Homeless Emergency on Joe Rodota Trail

[Farmer Lynda]

Reposted from Lynda Hopkins facebook page from Monday, Dec 30th, by Barry :waccosun:

****JOE RODOTA TRAIL — PERSONAL THOUGHTS & COUNTY UPDATE****

TL;DR SUMMARY: County is investing $11.6M in solutions to the Joe Rodota Trail encampment to get residents off the trail and into alternative housing and shelter ASAP, and I will keep pushing for solutions to be implemented as quickly as possible.

LONG VERSION:
Of the three years I’ve been in office, more than 90% of my time has been spent under a local disaster declaration. We’ve faced down flood, fire, flood, and fire — with some corporation-caused power shutoffs and school lockdowns thrown in for good measure. (At the County offices, we joke that we’re still waiting for the locusts and the plague... and then we laugh nervously, and then we knock on wood.)

I’m not sorry to see 2019 in the rearview mirror. It was a tough year for many of our communities, and many of my friends and family members struggled as well.

2019 ended, as it began, with a declared local emergency. But the final emergency was different than the others: it was a humankind, manmade disaster. In December, the County of Sonoma declared a state of emergency due to the 200+ person encampment on the Joe Rodota Trail (JRT).

I have been pushing the County of Sonoma to address the deteriorating situation on the JRT for months. In fact, I’d requested that the encampment be agendized for public discussion by the Board of Supervisors in mid-October, and was urging staff to come up with creative solutions to address the growing crisis — but then the Kincade Fire hit, and staff was forced to turn their attention to emergency operations, sheltering, and short-term fire recovery. (It’s worth noting that we did actually make progress on addressing the encampment during the Kincade Fire; we were able to move dozens of residents into alternative housing with very low recidivism. The camp actually shrank down to under 40 residents during the Kincade Fire.)

But that’s the past. Here we are, on the cusp of 2020, with more than 200 people camped along a public trail inside the city limits of Santa Rosa. The City of Santa Rosa is now broken into political districts, just the way the County is, but we don’t yet have any locally elected representatives for the area of southwestern Santa Rosa that includes the JRT, so I have been meeting with Mayor Tom Schwedhelm to discuss solutions since early October.

We ask ourselves the multi-billion-dollar question throughout California, which is home to one out of four of the 550,000 homeless people living in the United States. That question is: how do we end homelessness? And more immediately, what do we do about the JRT?

Some residents have suggested that we should simply arrest all of the homeless people. I do not agree with criminalizing homelessness. Arresting people is the wrong answer to unaffordable housing, poverty, low wages, inadequate healthcare, mental illness, and addiction, which are just some of the causes of homelessness in Sonoma County. In addition to that, criminalizing homelessness is a bad use of taxpayer dollars. Jail is one of the most expensive forms of housing we have in Sonoma County. As Sheriff Essick told me at a recent meeting, jail costs nearly $200/day per inmate. Oh, and the jail is full. (So, if you want to suggest arresting homeless people, you should be prepared to advise on who you’re going to let out of jail in order to let them in.)

Finally, it’s actually now illegal to arrest people for living on public property unless they have been provided with an alternative place to go. And while we are working on it every day, we currently don’t have alternatives identified for the 200+ residents camped on the JRT. The County of Sonoma is under a court injunction dictating how we can address encampments; we are also held to the outcome of a legal case in Boise.

You know what’s criminal? Crime, and it should be treated as such. Law enforcement should absolutely address those making a living selling illegal drugs; people engaged in human or sex trafficking; thieves and anyone perpetrating violent acts. Whether someone is homeless or housed, they should be arrested for these crimes. Unfortunately, the JRT has become a magnet for crime — and in many instances, it’s the homeless residents themselves being preyed on by criminals who see them as an easy target. Some of the people living on the JRT sleep during the day because they are too afraid to sleep at night.

It’s clear to everyone that the JRT is not a good place for people to live. The current situation is unacceptable for the unhoused residents who are living in inhumane conditions, for the residents living in houses nearby, and for the cyclists and pedestrians who would like to have an open trail to commute on. It’s a disgrace and a symptom of governmental failure at all levels — from the feds, who fail to provide an adequate number of housing vouchers and fail to offer an adequate mental healthcare safety net; to the state, which has not yet committed to an ongoing funding source to allow local government to meaningfully address homelessness; to the local level, where we have failed to build adequate affordable housing for our residents.

So what DO we do? How DO we move forward?

Over the past few months, I have fought hard for governmental resources and solutions for the JRT. That work has culminated in some substantial action:

One week ago, the Board of Supervisors declared a state of emergency regarding the Joe Rodota Trail that includes some “teeth” to streamline the permitting process for developing solutions. More importantly, at that meeting, we also put our money where our mouth is.

We approved funding for an $11.6M suite of solutions to address the JRT encampment. We invested $4M in coordinated care for JRT residents, which includes 15 detox and residential treatment beds for addiction. We earmarked $2M to stand up two “outdoor shelters” — an alternative location to camp which would have running water, sanitation facilities, electricity, and wraparound services. We are also adding master leases of apartments to provide permanent supportive housing, and are purchasing six houses which will serve as “congregate housing” (meaning people will share a house, but have their own bedroom). Two of those homes will come before the Board of Supervisors for approval on January 14.

In addition to serving on the Board of Supervisors, I also serve on the Home Leadership Council of Sonoma County. Through that entity I was able to secure, with Supervisor Susan Gorin’s support, nearly $400,000 worth of funding for community based organizations to help address the Joe Rodota Trail crisis. (By the way, if there is any silver lining whatsoever to the current crisis, it is in the hundreds of volunteers who are spending their own money and time to care for the residents of the camp, and to try to advocate for solutions on behalf of those residents. The kindness and generosity of the community has amazed me.)

So. That’s what local government has been up to. Will these solutions be enough to solve all of the homeless problems in the County? Absolutely not. Will these solutions be fast enough? No — but please know that I am working with staff each and every day to accelerate the implementation of solutions. Are these solutions expensive? Yes, until you look at the completely unacceptable alternative.

I will continue to fight for solutions, and continue to fight for their speedy implementation. It’s time to get people off the trail, and into a better place to call home. In fact, it’s well past time.

For additional information on the Board action, and for updates on the JRT situation, please visit:
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2019-12-31_01-08-51.png
Homeless Emergency on the Joe Rodota Trail (JRT) (https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/Newsroom/Homeless-Emergency/?fbclid=IwAR2ZbUu9h4zK5G6WWmvKYnkpngGaDFD8OzHM6Oh-ItzQVCy4sOt9lbH8iEI)

[Stuart]

Ms Hopkins, a reply to your note....

"Finally, it’s actually now illegal to arrest people for living on public property unless they have been provided with an alternative place to go"

If someone were to take a dump in the middle of the Santa Rosa Square, maybe shooting up, selling drugs, lighting a fire, you are saying you haven't done anything because that person said if you don't have shelter for me, I will continue my dangerous and anti social actions?

This is your flimsy excuse? Really?
Are you saying the legal staff WE pay for advises none of the following are eligible for arrest?
Is is legal to defecate in the bushes for months on public property?
Is it legal to urinate for months on public property?
Is it legal to have open fires and generators on public property?
Is it legal to shoot up and sell drugs on public property?
Is it legal to have many many dogs poop for half a year and leave it on public property?
Is nudity legal on public property?

Ms Hopkins, your excuse of allowing The Occupation is worthless. Any and all of the above are sound legal grounds for removal, so do not hide behind the cloak of 'we can't do anything', "blame the courts" whining for your failure to prevent and stop this growth to its current size.

And which will grow because Santa Rosa is now a beacon to homeless around the state and country.
We now pay for them!

You, as the highest elected official with jurisdiction, allowed this to become the official "emergency" it now is.
How can you not have noticed a few tents, then maybe a dozen, then more and more along Rte12?
Why did you not call in the resources and say fix this now?
BEFORE it becoming an official "Emergency"?

YOU are the boss, you permitted this to expand, you are all talk except for the recent official actions:
Just some of your City and County proposals, I guess from the $12 million:
-"protect the well being of the occupants" NOT our community, The Occupation, NOT our "well being"
-"private security for occupants" Who are you protecting and from whom?
- "establish disposable needle bins"

These actions are out of Kafka or Alice in Wonderland! This is real? Unfortunately, yes.
With our tax dollars.

Boy, don't do us any favors. A neighbor commented "WHY DO THEY HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN US?"

We ask you how many homeless are within one mile of your farm? What is the answer? 2,10, 20 100?
Or, none?

Well, our community is within "30 feet", "40 feet" of The Occupation you have allowed to happen.
You want to do something other than talk and give services away to The Occupiers?
Then YOU take in how many on your property, or 30 feet away?
How many will you allow to crap and pee and light fires for months and the fires going to this day?
How many Ms Hopkins? Ten, fifty, 215?
Or none?

You are the boss, you should be visiting The Occupation every day and observing the fires and health hazards.
You are the captain and you have to be recalled for dereliction of duty for public health and safety.

You serve US. NOT the "occupiers"
You have failed at the $200,000 yr taxpayer paid salary you are collecting.
You say it is complex, we say it is very simple: our safety and well being is at risk
And you and your colleagues are more concerned about the "well being" of the occupants.
You have failed and must be recalled, removed or resign. You have not protected us.

[podfish]

Ok, I think I found the place that triggered your Kavanaugh-esque purple-faced outrage. It's this [ QUOTE ] from me:



I know there are plenty of people who feel like screaming their outrage without feeling like they should bother to understand the details or, heaven forbid, have a solution in mind beyond "make this stop happening to ME".

True, it uses Ascii-34 but only the most literal-minded reader would miss that it's paraphrasing your post that, for anyone who cared, could be found inches above on their screen. I used the paraphrase to extract the essence of your post, which was completely selfish and inward-focused, showing no concern for the welfare of anyone else involved and being totally dismissive of sincere efforts at dealing with the problem for everyone involved. It was that uncharitable and inhumane perspective that drew my attention, not the complaint about ineffective government which has some merit.

I was kinda done with it until this morning's post doubled-down on the worst aspects of your viewpoint. Maybe I didn't point out the frankly evil part of your views clearly enough before: it's the continual use of "THEY" (which is a real quote, this time) vs. "US", and the ludicrous statement that "You serve US. NOT the 'occupiers'". Wrong, wrong, un-American, un-Christian at Christmas, inhumane completely. Check 'm out, since apparently they're hanging over your fence. Don't they resemble people at all to you? ... yeah, your post pisses me off a lot, I notice that more as I type...



....
Boy, don't do us any favors. A neighbor commented "WHY DO THEY HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN US?"
.....
You are the boss,
...

You serve US. NOT the "occupiers"

[Imagery]

Ms Hopkins, a reply to your note....due to your schizophrenic leanings, I'll not dwell on the fact that her title is Supervisor Hopkins, or Mrs. Hopkins as she is married...

"Finally, it’s actually now illegal to arrest people for living on public property unless they have been provided with an alternative place to go". TL;DR version of the ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the last step before the Supreme Court of the United States. Defy this ruling, and you'll be begging for mercy...and rights...and due process...

If someone were to take a dump in the middle of the Santa Rosa Square Bad example, being as there is a public restroom within three blocks of this location... maybe shooting up... because you, in your vast experience can tell the difference between insulin and meth... , selling drugs... have you ever witnessed a transaction involving the exchange of drugs for anything of intrinsic value!?! If a law enforcement official witnesses this exchange, the dealer, and quite possibly the customer, are both headed to jail. lighting a fire knee jerk hyperbole, because there is a difference between lighting a small warming fire because you do not have shelter, and dumping gallons of fuel to burn a neighborhood down. you are saying you haven't done anything because that person said if you don't have shelter for me, I will continue my dangerous and anti social actions?

This is your flimsy excuse? Really? She'd be wise to take the appointment after yours where you let the Ninth Circuit Court know you're going to tell them to F*** off and remove the sub-humans by any means necessary.
Are you saying the legal staff WE pay for advises none of the following are eligible for arrest?

Is is legal to defecate in the bushes on public property?
Does the person have a choice? Do they own multiple homes, have access to indoor plumbing, bathrooms and the like, or are they simply hard pressed to find food, water and shelter in order to sustain life?
Is it legal to urinate on public property?
See my statement above.
Is it legal to have open fires and generators on public property?
Does this person have a shelter capable of having environmental controls (Heating/Ventilation) that are independent of weather conditions? A canvas or plastic tarp or tent is NOT capable of independent control of the environment inside the structure.
Is it legal to shoot up and sell drugs on public property?
Unless you are a DEA licensed medical physician currently licensed in this state to prescribe pharmaceuticals, or a licensed pharmacist, it is NOT legal to sell drugs ANYWHERE in the state on public OR private property.
Is it legal to have many many dogs poop for half a year and leave it on public property?
Look in the mirror...because I'm certain that if you're honest with yourself, you've let your dog crap in the neighbors' yard and not picked it up.
Is nudity legal on public property?
With a permit, it is in San Francisco.

Ms Hopkins... again, the ignorant belittling considering your promoting her to "boss" in order to pass the blame... your excuse of allowing The Occupation is worthless. As is your excuse for existence Any and all of the above are sound legal grounds for removal... if you're a delusional narcissist, because any second year law student could take a proverbial CWIS to your flimsy hyperbolic crap (the diarrhea you're spewing from your pie-hole) so do not hide behind the cloak of 'we can't do anything' "blame the courts" whining... again, you're the only whinemaker who's unreasonable demands are laughable for your failure to prevent and stop this growth to its current size.

And which will grow because Santa Rosa is now a beacon to homeless around the state and country.
We now pay for them! You'll have to argue that one with the residents of the lower Russian River area, whose homeless issues are second to none in this state.

You, as the highest elected official with jurisdiction which personality is this, promoting her, so you can assign all the blame to her? allowed this to become the official "emergency" it now is.
How can you not have noticed a few tents, then maybe a dozen, then more and more along Rte12?
Personally, I know you lack the intelligence to read a map, otherwise you could see the size of the district she represents. I, unlike you, qualified for membership in Mensa.
Why did you not call in the resources and say fix this now?
Again, this is a waste of time to get you to pay attention to anyone but yourself.
BEFORE it becoming an official "Emergency"?

YOU are the boss... again, how can you promote her if you don't have the authority? you permitted... egregious lie... this to expand... much like your pie-hole trying to spew out hatred, divisiveness and ignorance..., you are all talk except for the recent official actions:

Just some of your City and County proposals, I guess from the $12 million:
-"protect the well being of the occupants" NOT our community, The Occupation, NOT our "well being"
-"private security for occupants" Who are you protecting and from whom?
- "establish disposable needle bins"

These actions are out of Kafka or Alice in Wonderland! This is real? Unfortunately, yes.
With our tax dollars.

Boy, don't do us any favors. A neighbor commented "WHY DO THEY HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN US?"

We ask you how many homeless are within one mile of your farm? What is the answer? 2,10, 20 100?
Or, none?

Well, our community is within "30 feet", "40 feet" of The Occupation you have allowed to happen...again, lies...hope you have fire-resistant slacks or jeans on because they're aflame.
You want to do something other than talk and give services away to The Occupiers?
Do you want to do anything but lie, spread vitriol and slander? So far, your actions indicate NO.
She, unlike you, has reached out to offer to listen to productive (i.e. not hateful or spiteful) ideas you have on providing solutions (which you are incapable of doing).

Then YOU take in how many on your property, or 30 feet away?
How many will you allow to crap and pee and light fires for months and the fires going to this day?
How many Ms Hopkins? Ten, fifty, 215?
Or none?
Look in the mirror, if you can stand to look yourself in the eye. Ask yourself the very same question.

You are the boss...
You are the captain...
You serve US. NOT the "occupiers"(he's a compulsive LIAR and even asbestos pants won't stand for the flames he's summoning)
You have failed at the $200,000 yr (lying again, see $125,000 figure from another thread on the same subject) taxpayer paid salary you are collecting.
You say it is complex, we say it is very simple: our safety and well being is at risk
And you and your colleagues are more concerned about the "well being" of the occupants.
You have failed and must be recalled, removed or resign. You have not protected us.





I'll be praying that WHEN you are condemned to eternity in hell, Someone shows you 10x the amount of mercy and empathy you've shown to your fellow man. To me, you're simply a worthless waste of DNA, and have less value to me than the homeless you rail against.

[finnie]

This thread is out of control and has no bearing on the facts.
I refuse to see any more of this ignorant, hateful rhetoric from twisted individuals who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
I'm outta here.

[rossmen]

I think Stuart has it right. When he challenges us, do we want this in our backyard?, he is attacked. Because we are afraid. Recent court rulings declare housing as a constitutional right. This is big, way bigger than citizens United. You might think of the homeless population as a symptom of policy choices, I think of it as the first wave of refugees. Cities and county's are now responsible for providing homes for people camping in public parks, how far away are you? This is the 2020s. What we know, will change.

[podfish]

I think Stuart has it right. When he challenges us, do we want this in our backyard?, he is attacked. Because we are afraid. Recent court rulings declare housing as a constitutional right. This is big, way bigger than citizens United. You might think of the homeless population as a symptom of policy choices, I think of it as the first wave of refugees. Cities and county's are now responsible for providing homes for people camping in public parks, how far away are you? This is the 2020s. What we know, will change.sorry, but I completely disagree. When he shows the ugliest most defensive side of our society, he's attacked. If there'd been the slightest display of empathy or interest in solving the problem (ok, that's impossible, in addressing the problem effectively) this thread would be vastly different.

I do agree that this is way bigger than campaign finance reform, though. It's an issue that's been building for decades, that our economic system is inadvertently designed to create, and one that our political system is designed to treat with avoidance. Favelas and their equivalent are nothing new to the world. Camping-style homelessness isn't new to Sonoma County - it was a big part of the depression and never really went away.

What's new is that there really aren't enough places where people who make little or no money can find lodging, not enough SROs and no cheap apartments at all. Those were part of the solution before. Sorry to say, it is indeed that simple. The thing that's not simple is what can be done. I don't claim to have the statistics on what people earned thirty years ago, how many of them were here and what the various housing arrangements cost. Lucky for all of us, then, I'm not responsible for anything more than an opinion.

But FWIW I'm confident enough of it being close to the facts. People used to be able to live in a cheap place near their minimum-wage jobs. Most higher-end housing had people living in them and working in the community. Now, there are lots of the higher-priced homes owned by part-time residents, either using them as investments or planning to someday retire here.

None of the people with higher priced properties, resident or not, want development near them. People with housing in general appreciate the open space, and don't want housing either. People who earn low wages have housing and commute expenses way disproportionate to their income. I work with people who commute from SF and get their bridge tolls paid by the company. Someone working at McDonalds driving in from Vallejo doesn't get that help - and if their car dies, they're probably out of work. And there aren't adequate social services for mental health. People who may have been able to hang on to a low-wage job and pay a low rent if they had some help are now on their own, and they probably pay for any lapse in keeping their shit together by ending up as neighbors to our sensitive friend, sleeping out on the bike path with others who provide at least some semblance of a support group.

The only fix is for there to be (I won't say 'for us to provide' because that's a triggering phrase apparently) housing that even those who used to be called 'indigent' can pay for. It would really help if some effort was made so that it didn't cost so damn much to be a resident of this country, much less this particular county. We ask those least able to do it, those with the least resources, to deal with a ton of stress while trying to meet their daily needs. What could go wrong with that?

[Thad]

"We can't do something that works because we don't want it to be too attractive and bring in more people."

It was said before to other purpose but its as true now for this

"It takes a village"

It needs a place to be and and a reasonable chance to be. It always happens like this, low rents collect the creatives, they do their thing it attracts the money, the money comes in and buys everything then forces out those who made the place cool. Who now can't afford to be there.

Then when those people who own everything, try to run everything the talent that was there that could fix everything had been priced out of the decision making. So the small minds are trying to tackle a large problem and all they can do is throw money around, $125,000 for a portapotty, they could rent a building to do the same and even provide showers and create a small business with it to pay for itself, but they're too used to big dollars and the prestige of administering it when smaller monies could do larger things if they just would get out of the way.

[BEE KIND]

I am with you. This is why I stopped using Nextdoor, because of all the hateful insults and arguing among neighbors. And we wonder why we are always engaged in endless wars. SMH


This thread is out of control and has no bearing on the facts.
I refuse to see any more of this ignorant, hateful rhetoric from twisted individuals who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
I'm outta here.

[spam1]

So at the risk of being called a racist xenophone:


. People used to be able to live in a cheap place near their minimum-wage jobs. Most higher-end housing had people living in them and working in the community. Now, there are lots of the higher-priced homes owned by part-time residents, either using them as investments or planning to someday retire here.

But there are also a LOT of illegal immigrants (yes, no human is illegal so please just put your favorite euphemism for undocumented people who don't have a legal right to be in the US) in Sonoma county: PD says 28,0000. so about 10 times the number of homeless. I can't help but think that they are more of a cause of lack of housing at the low end than second home owners, but I haven't the stats to prove either. However, let's assume they are willing to live four-times as dense as homeless people (more people sharing houses), that would still be many thousands of housing units. And a lot of them would be in converted illegal garages, etc.
But I haven't heard any discussion about how illegal immigrants affect housing; and I will point out that Sonoma county picks up roughly 1500 additional residents based on our share of illegal immigrants migrating into the country each year. So, we need at least 1500 new housing units for that.
Not that I'm against illegal immigration, but it does have at least some negative effects on low-end housing in the county.



People who may have been able to hang on to a low-wage job and pay a low rent if they had some help are now on their own, and they probably pay for any lapse in keeping their shit together by ending up as neighbors to our sensitive friend, sleeping out on the bike path with others who provide at least some semblance of a support group.

In fact, I really wonder if a majority of those camping on JRT haven't the where-with-all for any rent at all. I would guess that we are really talking providing free housing as they probably can't afford really any rent at all.



The only fix is for there to be (I won't say 'for us to provide' because that's a triggering phrase apparently) housing that even those who used to be called 'indigent' can pay for. It would really help if some effort was made so that it didn't cost so damn much to be a resident of this country, much less this particular county. We ask those least able to do it, those with the least resources, to deal with a ton of stress while trying to meet their daily needs. What could go wrong with that?
Thus, we have to provide barely adequate housing at almost no cost, and figure out how to keep SSU students (and as a student I stayed in some pretty bad places, just to get cheap, cheap, cheap), homeless from other counties, and people in poor housing now from consumeing every housing unit provided, leaving nothing for those on JRT.

The only solution I can think of is a kind of "curry cabin" approach, with common bathrooms/showers. On a platform, out of the rain, and the cost should be reasonable. And they can't be that bad, people pay a lot for them at Yosemite. Should be cheap to construct, at least as good as camping on JRT, and not so great that it brings in even more homeless to the county.

[rossmen]

I think Stuart has it right because we are afraid of what's coming, and we know it. I rent homes to working class people. When I tell someone they need to go, I worry that I will kill them. Like they won't be able to find another home, and homelessness kills. My biggest challenge in providing affordable housing is permit sonoma. They want money from me right now for an old shed. Neighbors are the second biggest challenge. I deal with homeless and housing pressure all the time.

Housing as a constitutional right is a game changer. In the past when I heard people advocate for it I snickered because I knew the truth, it was not. Now that it is l know, as a housing provider at the low end of the scale, how fundamentally unprepared local government is to do shit. So yes, county bike trails are it. One way to think about it is as emergency shelter. Camp and be on the waiting list for greater government services. There's a lot of capacity to build the waiting list.

[Farmer Lynda]

Reposted from Lynda Hopkins Facebook page
I am grateful to my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors for supporting a homeless emergency declaration regarding the Joe Rodota Trail in December, and also for unanimously approving a $11.6M suite of solutions. This enabled us to finally treat the Joe Rodota Trail like the emergency that it is, and to have the financial capacity available to address that emergency effectively.

In fact, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors and Department of Emergency Management staff have taken the unprecedented step of utilizing the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and an incident command protocol in order to quickly, effectively analyze alternative outdoor shelter locations and plan logistics for the emergency shelter implementation and encampment closure.

What this means: The County of Sonoma’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is in full swing, and today we had staff liaisons present from the City of Santa Rosa as well. This is helping us to mobilize the massive effort needed to offer services and solutions to the 200+ camp residents and to move forward with clearing the camp and reopening the trail.
48577
We will also be holding a TOWN HALL this Friday at 6pm at the Roseland Library to share the results of the EOC planning process, and offer a timeline for what residents can expect, and when they can expect it.

Brief notes regarding current operations:

Emergency Operations Center
· This EOC is developing proposals for the Board to consider, including a plan to move occupants from the Joe Rodota Trail (trail) and develop a temporary shelter by January 31, 2020.
· The intent of the EOC is to address the immediate health and safety concerns and return the trail to its intended use.
· If the Board moves forward with this approach, resources and services will be available at the temporary shelter that support the health and wellbeing of individuals.
· The work of the EOC is occurring parallel to the work staff is doing to address the long term solutions with regard to shared housing, master leasing, indoor-outdoor shelters and support services.

ACCESS Interdepartmental Multi-Disciplinary Team (IMDT)
· The IMDT intensive care coordination on the JRT is scheduled to begin on Wednesday January 8, 2020.
· The IMDT has a comprehensive plan for outreach and engagement and housing placement.
· The ACCESS IMDT addresses the behavioral health, medical, and social service needs of this population through coordinated care.

Master Leases
· RFQ released on January 7, 2020. RFP is now an RFQ for a quicker timeline and ability to partner with landlords with available units.
· We are moving quickly to get individuals placed into housing.

Indoor-Outdoor Shelters
· RFP released on January 7, 2020.
· A community stakeholder engagement meeting for specific design elements of the indoor-outdoor shelter sites occurred January 3, 2020 at the Veteran’s Hall in Santa Rosa from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
· A number of design needs and solutions were discussed and staff will incorporate this feedback in its request for proposals (RFQ).
· The meeting was well received by those who participated and included homeless services providers, advocates, occupants from the trail, and community members.
· The RFP process parallel processes to allow those who are ready to submit to do, while we evaluate other proposals.

Town hall:
Friday, 6PM, Roseland Library
Learn about plans to move campers off the trail by the end of the month, and share your questions, concerns, and ideas.

[Dorothy Friberg]

The JRT Community Meeting will probably be still another do-nothing bureaucracy that sucks up time and money. How about using county land and buildings up at Chanate for "relocation". Many of the addicts/alcoholics will be accessible to care as well as many other displaced persons. Buildings are already in place. We already have the land, let's use them. Yes, that neighborhood thinks THEIR shit doesn't stink but it's about time that they see that indeed a third world country does exist in Sonoma County.

[sealwatcher]

Notwithstanding my gratitude to Dorothy for her post, I do not agree with her summation of today's meeting being a suck. Many good people are at this, predominantly Lynda Hopkins and outside government, many people coming to the aid of the people at the encampment.

The JRT Community Meeting will probably be still another do-nothing bureaucracy that sucks up time and money. ...

[wisewomn]

Here's an encampment in Oakland that seems to be working for everyone:

Good News Network: Oakland Residents Transform Abandoned Lot into Sanctuary for Camping Homeless Women (https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/oakland-woman-took-over-vacant-lot-to-house-homeless-women/?utm_campaign=newsletters&utm_medium=weekly_mailout&utm_source=10-01-2020)

[tommy]

I was at the meeting on the JRT, Friday night, at the Roseland Library. It was coordinated by Supervisor Hopkins, with Supervisor Gorin, SR Mayor Schwedhelm, and Councilman Tibbets in attendance.

Supervisor Hopkins said the Trail would be cleared by Jan 31. This was well received by the 200-300 people in attendance. CDC Manager Robinson spoke, explaining that beginning on Jan 8, County staff has been meeting with each individual on the trail, and determining their health and housing needs... and that this would guide their move off the trail. The implication was that all people on the trail would be offered another place to live. Supervisor Hopkins said 30 large tents have been ordered. County Parks manager spoke, that the trail would be cleaned, restored where necessary, and suggested that security would maintain the land as a park and not an encampment.

Most of the meeting was in the format of World Cafe, with 8-10 people sitting at each round table. Each person got 2 minutes to speak to their table, of their concerns and solutions regarding the homeless in Sonoma Co, and the JRT in particular. Then a representative from each table addressed the room, for 1 minute, regarding the table's concerns and solutions. Then there was a Q&A with Supervisor Hopkins.

It was said that 20% of the people on the JRT are happy living there, and would likely not want to move. However, it was implied, tho not directly stated, that they would have to move off the JRT. The legal consent decree evidently allows homeless to be moved if they are given an alternative place to live.

A few outspoken people favoring the recall of Supervisor Hopkins were there. They were repeatedly requested to observe the meeting guidelines of good respectful communication. There were a few people who spoke on behalf of the homeless. There were many people from the W SR community attending, who related the problems associated with the JRT encampment, of drugs, crime, rats, bad behavior, mental illness, decline of home values, lack of security, and more.

[Valet Posting Service]

Here is the latest news from the County of Sonoma public information team regarding homeless solutions.

——————

Hello Sonoma County, we apologize for the long post - hang in there, we have a lot of information to share.
Sonoma County is planning to move occupants of the Joe Rodota Trail (trail) to permanent supportive housing and sheltering in other locations in the County by January 31, 2020.

Our ultimate goal is to get the individuals on the trail into permanent housing while providing support services, including medical, behavioral, and social services—such as food assistance, cash assistance, and applications for social security disability benefits.

According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, permanent supportive housing reduces the impact associated with the use intensive crisis services, including hospitals, jails/prisons and shelters.

In addition to these emergency actions, the County is continuing to offer shelter beds to people experiencing homelessness, and working to match people experiencing homelessness to available housing, shelter, and services.

Read on for specifics on shared homes and outdoor shelters.

Shared Homes
The Board of Supervisors will consider purchasing three homes for shared housing at the upcoming board meeting on Tuesday, January 14th. The homes are located at:
• 8190, 8192 and 8194 Arthur Street in Cotati (multi-unit)
• 811 Davis Street in Santa Rosa
• 866 Sonoma Avenue in Santa Rosa

These homes will provide a stable environment with services tailored to each individual, to support their successful transition into their new home. Data shows that 95% of individuals remain housed after one year when they receive permanent supportive housing.

There will also be rules for residents enforced by professional property management, to ensure that residents can be good neighbors.

Neighbors have received notification of the County’s plans to purchase the homes, and the County will stay in touch with neighbors to address concerns moving forward.

We are committed to providing the level of supportive services needed to ensure the success of this endeavor. We consider the individuals who will reside in this home as County residents and part of our community.

Temporary Emergency Outdoor Shelter

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2020-01-11_12-20-33.pngThe Board of Supervisors will consider selecting one location for a temporary emergency shelter at their upcoming board meeting on Tuesday, January 14th. If a site is selected, the emergency outdoor shelter would be managed and supported by an operator. The potential locations are:
• Los Guillicos Center, 171 Pythian Road
• County Center, 300 Fiscal Drive

The selected site will be able to accommodate 60 people. The county is working to establish hardened shelter units, which are secure and private, with locking windows and doors. We've already ordered 30 pallet shelters, image attached to this post.

Outdoor shelters are not in themselves a solution to homelessness. The outdoor shelter model is designed to help people experiencing homelessness take their first step towards permanent stable housing. Services at the site would be geared to help people move into permanent supportive housing.

The site will provide shelter units, laundry and food service, sanitation and shower facilities, security measures, on-site parking for residents’ vehicles, secure storage for residents’ belongings, ADA compliance, and other measures to ensure health and safety.

An operator will be responsible for establishing rules and guidelines for the temporary shelter.

This temporary emergency shelter is a short-term solution before the County establishes two outdoor shelters, which will be operated for an additional 9 months as a pilot program (12 months total). Once the two pilot sites are identified, the temporary emergency outdoor shelter will be closed and residents relocated. An outdoor operator managed shelter is a new model for Sonoma County, and it has demonstrated positive results in other regions.

The County will continue to provide updated information as this process unfolds, and will reach out to businesses near any site that is selected and work to address concerns.

For more information on how the County is responding to homelessness please visit http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/Homeless-Emergency/ (http://sonomacounty.ca.gov/Homeless-Emergency/?fbclid=IwAR225mSga2WxSNGXsH932mLmk0VXiuLnbgcsrIx300DljF9XavUdnhFyTkM). If you have questions, concerns, or ideas please email us at [email protected].

[cyberanvil]

I can tell you that the "neighbors" I've seen posting on local media are not very happy with the proposed purchase of the houses on Arthur St. in Cotati. Buying a house such as the one at 8190 Arthur Street ((2638 s/f) appraised at $995,000 seems ludicrous.

[Dorothy Friberg]

OK, guy, how about YOU make a space for at lest one person where YOU live?

I can tell you that the "neighbors" I've seen posting on local media are not very happy with the proposed purchase of the houses on Arthur St. in Cotati. ...

[Valet Posting Service]

http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
At tense town hall, Sonoma County announces plan to clear Santa Rosa homeless camp by end of month
(https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10571074-181/at-tense-town-hall-sonoma)
CHANTELLE LEE
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
January 10, 2020, 10:31PM

At a tense town hall meeting Friday night, Supervisor Lynda Hopkins announced Sonoma County’s plan to clear the sprawling homeless encampment along the Joe Rodota Trail in west Santa Rosa by the end of the month.

In front of hundreds of county residents who came to Roseland Library to learn about the county’s plans, Hopkins called the trail a “symbol of failure,” saying that she and all other government officials had to take responsibility for the homeless crisis.

“We all have a part and piece of that failure,” Hopkins said. “We need to do more to address this encampment.”

The town hall came as county leaders have proposed a nearly $12 million suite of measures to address growing safety and sanitation concerns over the camp, which has increased to 220 people during the past several months. Among those measures is $5 million the county will use to buy six large, multibedroom homes — three of which already have been identified — to house up to 60 people currently living on the trail.

The county also has considered creating sanctioned encampments, and announced two possible locations just before Friday night’s town hall: the first on Administration Drive, next to the county courthouse; and the second at the Los Guilicos campus on Pythian Road, in the Oakmont neighborhood.

The crowd at the town hall was divided. Some were homeowners frustrated by the growing homeless population in their neighborhood; others were angry that people weren’t showing the community more compassion. A few came with signs that demanded Hopkins, who is up for reelection in March, be recalled from office, blaming her for a lack of action on the issue. Others, though, held up signs that said “Humanity & Compassion” and “We Rise By Lifting Others” to show their support for trail residents.

Facilitators of the town hall broke community members up into groups, asking them to discuss their thoughts about the trail with each other before sharing them with the rest of the room. Many expressed safety and sanitation concerns, citing the rodent infestation in the area, while others complained that the issue was lowering their property values.

“I can’t sleep at night,” said Julie Lumine, who lives behind the trail. Lumine, 65, said there are rats running throughout her apartment complex, and complained about the smell of campfires.

Some, though, countered homeowners’ frustrations with the fears of camp residents, stating that many felt dehumanized and criminalized for being homeless.

Nicholle Vannucci, 41, was one of just a few camp residents who came to the town hall. She said most just didn’t know about the meeting, but even if they had, she doubted they would have come.

“We’re judged every second for being homeless,” Vannucci said. “It’s rough. I’ve been hearing what people are saying. It hurts.”

While Hopkins thought the meeting was “very productive,” many in attendance were skeptical of the county’s proposals.

“There’s no way they’re going to get that whole trail cleared out by the end of the month,” said 66-year-old Jay Birks.

Birks, who lives one block off the trail, called the county’s proposals “Band-Aid” solutions.

He criticized the sanctioned encampments, adding that it wasn’t solving the problem, but “moving the problem somewhere else.”

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10571074-181/at-tense-town-hall-sonoma)

[cyberanvil]

OK, guy, how about YOU make a space for at lest one person where YOU live?

Sure. So how many mini houses would 11.6M buy? Quite a few I'd imagine. My house, no need. How about a nice community on Ragle Ranch Park land? Problem solved. But such ideas are too simple for the government eggheads.

:thumbsup:

[cyberanvil]

http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
At tense town hall, Sonoma County announces plan to clear Santa Rosa homeless camp by end of month (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10571074-181/at-tense-town-hall-sonoma)


Out of sight, out of mind. :nod:

[Fortunecookie]

At the beginning of meeting Lynda Hopkins already laid out a plan of what supervisors are planning on voting on and doing. It appeared to me they have already made up their minds as to what they are going to do and how they will spend our money prior to this public meeting.It seems to me this whole meeting was more of a farce just to let the public vent- just like that of courthouse square meetings.
My suggestion at our table was for a solution and that was "What if the residents of sonoma county were to take in 1 homeless person into their own homes?" They could triage each individual person for proper placement. I offered up my home for 1 homeless person to live with me.If enough people in the community would step up to offer housing, I believe it could help alot. I told our table and a man named Leo who works with Lynda Hopkins my suggestion. Neither our table or Leo's table mentioned my suggestion during there 1 minute speech. I thought Ihad brought a genuine suggestion and partial solution to the table and to Leo of which it fell on deaf ears. I do not think government alone can remedy this crisis- it takes our whole community too.

[ray50sfo]

I get that many people suffer from homelessness, and I finally had to weigh in on this long discussion.

Note the facts. Homelessness is growing mostly in Democrat controlled liberal cities and states. Billions are being spent on the problem, most going to "programs" and employing friends, supporters and relatives of elected officials. The problem continues to get worse.

I ask myself the question, who organized the Ridota Trail encampment? Did it really spring up organically? Who is profiting from this "crisis"?

Homelessness is a deeply entrenched problem of human suffering with no easy solutions. I offer this thoughtful perspective on the problem from a meta level.

Please try to overcome any inherent prejudice towards Fox News and watch this analysis with an open mind. It details the problem at a meta level.

The knee jerk reaction, could be "you have no heart". But going deeper, simply enabling the homeless with an immediate solution to a chronic problem robs them and society of a lasting, true long term solution.

My two cents, I reserve the right to have my own opinion and draw my own conclusions.

Thank you,



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtgxaA-Sitg

[podfish]

I get that many people suffer from homelessness, and I finally had to weigh in on this long discussion.

Note the facts. Homelessness is growing mostly in Democrat controlled liberal cities and statesyeah, and opioid addiction and meth cooking is growing mostly in Republican controlled areas.

Hey, why don't you identify a few rapidly-growing attractive areas where the Republicans are in control? What wonderful right-wing policies are we missing that solve the problem of homelessness in those non-existent cities, that make people pull themselves up by their bootstraps and stop messing around? I'll wait... this is the 'hopes and prayers' school of responses, blaming people for their circumstances because of course everyone who's moral and good has nothing but success. It's those fuzzy Democratic do-gooder instincts that are ruining the moral fiber and probably their precious bodily fluids too.

The reason people in areas like this one, like SF and LA, and ilike other lefty hotbeds end up homeless is because they're priced out of the kind of shelters where they used to be invisible to most, and because the economic activity generates more inequality. I do blame the Democrats for failing to deal with that, but I certainly don't think that means that you can credit Republicans with doing anything at all. They're the masters of simplistic solutions like jailing the poor; they are the ones refusing to pay for social programs to support people thrown out of institutions that used to help them. Too many Democrats also are reluctant to step up, but somehow I don't think that's what you're blaming them for.

[ray50sfo]

Right, naneh, naneh nanhe ha. Clearly you're more interested in being "right" and on you team winning than on a real solution to a tragic human suffering. And you wonder why I don't debate you point by point? Pointless.Namaste and Goodbye.


yeah, and opioid addiction and meth cooking is growing mostly in Republican controlled areas.
.

[podfish]

Right, naneh, naneh nanhe ha. Clearly you're more interested in being "right" and on you team winning than on a real solution to a tragic human suffering. And you wonder why I don't debate you point by point? Pointless.Namaste and Goodbye.no, I don't wonder at all. Doesn't seem particularly debatable.

[rossmen]

Texas city's are doing way better dealing with the same homeless and housing problems. You might not find them attractive but many Californians do, their voting with their feet. Same kinds of services provided, definitely better coordinated, less tolerance for nasty behavior and more of a top down approach.


yeah, and opioid addiction and meth cooking is growing mostly in Republican controlled areas...

[podfish]

Texas city's are doing way better dealing with the same homeless and housing problems. You might not find them attractive but many Californians do, their voting with their feet. Same kinds of services provided, definitely better coordinated, less tolerance for nasty behavior and more of a top down approach.it's been a while since I've been to Texas, and I am curious as to how it feels there now. The two states seem to relish contrasting themselves against each other, so getting an impartial picture is tough from here. For example, the tech hubs seem to be turning Democrat, from what I can tell without direct personal experience. Houston sounds interesting - there seems to be a lot of industry still there, with a lot of working-class jobs, but because of their sprawl and zoning they have kept their prices down and so housing is still available. Is that a good tradeoff, if that's even an accurate appraisal? and to be fair, I haven't even looked up Houston's voting trends on Google, so for all I know it is another lefty hotbed. Kinda doubt it, though.

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

First I'll say I did not attend the meeting (I was not in the area).

But I'll also say your idea is a non-starter as far as any government is concerned. In our litigious society - the very idea of the government suggesting someone take a homeless person into their home opens up too many potential nightmares. From the host making claims of theft, assault, contracting HIV or Hepatitis from a needle... to the housed individual making claims of assault, unpaid labor, etc... Legal issues if you allow some to use your vehicle (insurance follows the driver not the vehicle). Legal claims by neighbors. Legal claims if the person dies in your home- whether from overdose or pre-existing health issues. It's something that simply is not going to happen... for many more reasons than the few I listed.

[WaterBird]

The county has $11m to spend to help? This is what we need to be doing. Check out this amazing community project in Austin TX. We have plenty of land here in SoCo to do something like this.

Let s do something real and lasting, not just shuffle them to another parking lot somewhere.

Community First! Village (https://mlf.org/community-first/)

[Thad]

Or spend a million dollars for a house? Whoever thought that up should be fired.
Empty lots, tools and materials on site, impromptu portable shelter developments with jackpot prizes for best designs to be able to move like an Indian tribe of old.
Barn raising crews for each persons shelter, Swami Mommy and the Garbage Guru's for grounds keeping. Madam Frog with The Kitchen Crew of Turtle Camp.

[Philip Tymon]

I have a few different extremely modest living situations on my property. I have had a number of people here who were essentially homeless or about to be homeless. Unfortunately in every single instance I found out very quickly why they were in the situation they were in-- mental illness/extremely difficult personality, extreme alcoholism, etc. and--- probably most important--- lack of gratitude and appreciation. Most problems, ultimately, stem from having an entitlement attitude rather than a gratitude attitude. So--- don't wait for other people to agree to do it--- do it and see what happens. Then you will know. I truly hope you have a better result than I did. But, in my experience (and I truly appreciate that you are trying to come up with solutions) your idea is just completely impractical.


...My suggestion at our table was for a solution and that was "What if the residents of sonoma county were to take in 1 homeless person into their own homes?" ...

[arthunter]

This is interesting ...

KPBS: Public Radio Program Sues To Uncover Secret Landlords Buying Up America’s Cities (https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/jan/07/organization-sues-treasury-department-reveal-shell/?utm_content=buffere7409&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer&fbclid=IwAR1utAH1uRBG1e0M8cfm-OqOtsQ3TVe2BewM6x1Xf8a6tw0N91M51jte-8s)

[tommy]

This is a great idea! There is a proposal in Sonoma County, with a nonprofit, to be a clearing house... for people with a spare bedroom, to rent it to someone without housing, who has been "vetted" by health professionals, associated with the nonprofit. The cost of the room would be underwritten by nonprofit funding.

See "The Blue Book on Homelessness" by Terry Rowan.


...My suggestion at our table was for a solution and that was "What if the residents of Sonoma County were to take in 1 homeless person into their own homes?" ...

[Barry]

From Lynda Hopkins Facebook page:
48599Want to listen to a thoughtful conversation on homelessness? On Friday, I had the opportunity to chat on air with local Press Democrat journalist Tyler Silvy — who has spent many hours interviewing trail residents, talking to neighbors, and covering County efforts to address the ongoing crisis — as well as Homeless Action! leader Adrienne Lauby, and Brenda Gilchrist from Citizens for Action Now. The conversation was gracefully facilitated by KQED’s Mina Kim. I really appreciated the information and perspectives that were shared by all participants, as well as the call-ins from local residents.

KQED: Tensions Mount as Sonoma County Begins Addressing Homeless Encampment (https://www.kqed.org/forum/2010101875281/tensions-mount-as-sonoma-county-begins-addressing-homeless-encampment?fbclid=IwAR0YQCNW1AifAdW9AJE42S4cPTUtXLvlWoVWEHyz3vDSaiG8MZc792q1J0o)

[podfish]

Or spend a million dollars for a house? Whoever thought that up should be fired.
Empty lots, tools and materials on site, impromptu portable shelter developments with jackpot prizes for best designs to be able to move like an Indian tribe of old.....yep, this is the kind of failure of imagination you get with government - and to be fair, with any organization that has multiple constituencies and so is afraid to do something too weird. They are way too risk averse, afraid they might be blamed if blame starts getting thrown around. Community groups can more easily blow off criticism from "special interests" which, again to be fair, includes the neighbors.

But it's pretty apparent that involving the people who need housing, along with members of the community who want to get engaged and help, is good in so many ways -- it's faster, more effective, builds a sense community, builds a sense of ownership and responsibility, and placates the critics who hate to see anyone get "free stuff".

[finnie]

Deep gratitude for Philip Tymon for his compassion and generosity.
But his experience proves what homeless advocates have been saying for years - stability of housing is not sufficient. No two people are the same but generally speaking, a hefty proportion of chronically homeless also need equally important services for mental illness, physical illness, alcohol and drug abuse and job training or retraining.
It's a complex problem but there are no shortcuts.


I have a few different extremely modest living situations on my property. I have had a number of people here who were essentially homeless or about to be homeless. Unfortunately....

[podfish]

Texas city's are doing way better dealing with the same homeless and housing problems. You might not find them attractive but many Californians do, their voting with their feet. Same kinds of services provided, definitely better coordinated, less tolerance for nasty behavior and more of a top down approach.well, I was looking at the news about the Astro's cheating penalty which reminded me to look at Houston's homelessness situation. I found this:
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2019/1118/Houston-we-have-a-solution-How-the-city-curbed-homelessness
and a similar one about Dallas. Plus this from Wikipedia:
------------

Is Dallas Texas Republican or Democrat?

Republicans control all statewide Texas offices, both houses of the state legislature and have a majority in the Texas congressional delegation. Democrats benefit heavily from its large cities; Austin, the state capital, votes Democratic, as do El Paso, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and the Rio Grande Valley.

so, given the extensive depth of my research, looks like Texas may not be in all that much different straights than we are.

[cyberanvil]

The county has $11m to spend to help? This is what we need to be doing. Check out this amazing community project in Austin TX. We have plenty of land here in SoCo to do something like this.

Let s do something real and lasting, not just shuffle them to another parking lot somewhere.



I know where's there is 157 acres of usable land.

[cyberanvil]

I'm sincerely curious. Has there ever been an in depth, accurate assessment of just what problems the homeless are facing and a percentage breakdown into categories? Some might, through no fault of their own, be economic casualties, but others? What percentage of homeless have mental/drug problems which prevent them from facing or dealing with reality. Someone who is self medicating and perhaps thinks they are on planet Jupiter is not going to be a candidate for free housing alone. Shelter, of course but mandatory treatment should be part of the solution. Let's say 65% of the homeless have mental/drug problems. Are these people really going to be able to handle free housing in a responsible manner? .

[podfish]

I'm sincerely curious. Has there ever been an in depth, accurate assessment of just what problems the homeless are facing and a percentage breakdown into categories? ...I don't know the breakdown. My statistically-invalid personal experience with people who've had periods of homelessness has been that it's not much of a surprise that it happened to them. The reverse is true, too -- I know a ton of people who I think are only 'successful' because they've been lucky; I'd imagine if enough adversity hit them of the type they're unsuited to handle, they'd end up out on the streets or couch-surfing. We have a very brittle society. I wouldn't be surprised if 65% of the working/housed population has mental/drug problems too. Maybe I know the wrong people...

So that's probably the root of my resistance to any evaluation where there's judgement about whether they deserve to be in that situation, with the implication that the fix is then to make them behave. (Not that that's part of your post...) I think in this, as in so many ways, our society rewards certain arbitrary things, including personality types, and penalizes others. I don't like solutions that are based on helping people recover the protestant work ethic.

The bottom line is we shouldn't tolerate people being hungry and homeless. I have a less strong feeling we shouldn't tolerate people being self-destructive, since that's a judgement I wouldn't want anyone to make about me. I guess that's my main socialist streak: as a society we produce a ton of stuff, and it doesn't seem inevitable that it gets allocated by historically-accidental measures of who deserves it or who created it. Don't leap to any straw-man opposite, like "to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities". It doesn't have to be that binary -- but equally, we can't let humans (and many people extend this to pets) suffer deprivation when there really isn't a need.

[Thad]

What's it take to imagine this a little more?


I know where's there is 157 acres of usable land.

[juna]

A Call to Action!
If you live around Sonoma County, you are probably well aware of the homeless encampment along the Joe Rodota trail in Santa Rosa.
The County has suggested that two sanctioned encampments be created to provide a safer and more sanitary place for the homeless to dwell. A group has been created to express their opposition to encampments, and so the County needs to know that there is actually strong public support for these Sanctioned Encampments to be established. Everyone deserves to a way to shower, have toilet facilities, trash receptor with services and a good night's sleep. Basics we all need to stabilize in order to keep a job or obtain a job.

We have started a petition for you to sign, which we would like to present to the County tomorrow, on Tuesday, Jan 14. the encampments could provide an excellent opportunity to demonstrate alternative natural building designs, offering the opportunity for those residents who are able to participate in their creation.
If you have a moment to sign and share this campaign, please click the link below.

Change.org: Support for Sanctioned Encampments (https://www.change.org/p/sonoma-county-board-of-supervisors-support-for-sanctioned-encampments?recruiter=2468793&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=petition_dashboard)

[rossmen]

I do have a lot of family in Texas though I visit infrequently. Your challenge and all the right rap on Cali homeless problems inspired me to research, mostly reading texas dailies. Very different situation. 25k vs 200k on the streets and emergency shelters. Houston, San Antonio and El Paso numbers going down. Partly could be housing cost, but prices are rising just as fast there. What I notice personally is the difference in culture. To be overly simplistic, self reliance vs entitlement. This is too easy an explanation why homeless numbers are rising in Dallas and Austin, the most liberal voting cities in Texas.

I'm quite skeptical about our counties effort, beyond my own efforts to provide energy efficient affordable housing I have no solutions. Sanctioned camps and safe parking seem reasonable, and with housing now a constitutional right, inevitable.


it's been a while since I've been to Texas, and I am curious as to how it feels there now. ...

[podfish]

What I notice personally is the difference in culture. To be overly simplistic, self reliance vs entitlement. This is too easy an explanation why homeless numbers are rising in Dallas and Austin, the most liberal voting cities in Texas. yeah, the hard part is to account for the effect of being unwelcoming. Does it promote more self-reliance and people finding solutions, or just displacement to less inhospitable places? Probably it's a mix, like everything.

Knowing people's tendency to form communities on their own, I would lean toward people heading to where others are, and the bellwethers going to a place that doesn't make life any harder than it has to be -- with limits, because people also have attachment to specific places. I guess that makes me believe more in displacement, though I do know that everyone does have a limit and most can take some steps toward solving their own problems if they really can't bear things.

I'd prefer a solution that makes it pretty easy to get off the street without a ton of coercion. I don't want people to be wards of the state or anything like that, but I'd love to see it possible to live without fully participating in the competitive capitalistic race. It'd be truly lovely if the solution applied somewhat to people like artists and others whose talents are wasted because they spend so much effort in earning rent and food.

I'm lucky - I have a creative job so it's not an all-or-nothing tradeoff for me. But I still fondly recall working at menial jobs where little energy was spent at work and lots was available for things that were meaningful. That's gone for almost everyone now and it's a huge loss. The side effect of a world where low-wage jobs still let you support yourself was that there were far less homeless.

[heresbruce]

A couple observations: from my friend- Judith D'Amico (https://www.facebook.com/judith.damico.3) Easy.....it's against the law to feed the homeless in Texas.....I was just there...
and from an article I re-posted earlier:

The Christian Science Monitor: Houston, we have a solution: How the city curbed homelessness
(https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2019/1118/Houston-we-have-a-solution-How-the-city-curbed-homelessness?fbclid=IwAR2hBr9rDDVtaCq5cY6Hoxk7ST1KzDS6JIqVokd_rD0meBo7n8KysjsTpAc)

[Philip Tymon]

Tomas--- following up on my comment, above, that would be a great idea-- if it works. Keep in mind that, as you know, a very large number of the homeless have mental & emotional problems, drug & alcohol problems, etc. Even the fact that a lot of them might smoke tobacco would likely be a problem with lots of people who might otherwise be willing to rent a room. Living in someone's home or even on their property is a very personal thing--- often hard enough to do with "regular" folks. And, after 30 days, the person becomes a "tenant" with full tenant's rights. Please let that sink in.

Not that I'm against the idea--- I'm actually totally for it. Just let's be realistic about it. If 10% of the homeless get housed through this, that's great. There is likely not one solution, but many--- so let's implement each one. (I also recall that, at one point, the County was asking people if there were someone-- a relative or friend--- who would house them if they could get there--- it turned out that something like 5-10% said "yes" and the County paid their bus fare to go live with the relative.)


This is a great idea! There is a proposal in Sonoma County, with a nonprofit, to be a clearing house... for people with a spare bedroom, to rent it to someone without housing, who has been "vetted" by health professionals, associated with the nonprofit. The cost of the room would be underwritten by nonprofit funding.

See "The Blue Book on Homelessness" by Terry Rowan.

[cyberanvil]

...
A group has been created to express their opposition to encampments, and so the County needs to know that there is actually strong public support for these Sanctioned Encampments to be established. ...I believe the Ninth Circuit Court just recently made a ruling that people living on public land could not be removed unless suitable accommodations were made. So if this 'other' group opposes encampments. do they have proposals for other accommodations?

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

I'm sincerely curious. Has there ever been an in depth, accurate assessment of just what problems the homeless are facing and a percentage breakdown into categories? Some might, through no fault of their own, be economic casualties, but others? What percentage of homeless have mental/drug problems which prevent them from facing or dealing with reality. Someone who is self medicating and perhaps thinks they are on planet Jupiter is not going to be a candidate for free housing alone. Shelter, of course but mandatory treatment should be part of the solution. Let's say 65% of the homeless have mental/drug problems. Are these people really going to be able to handle free housing in a responsible manner? .


There have been- but keep in mind this is a global problem so "results will vary". Try my favorite resource- Goolgle Scholar (https://scholar.google.com) which strips out the noise. You will often need journal access to read many of the results- but... there are often ways around this...and if nothing else once you find a study it is often easy to find analysis of it in other media.

I'll add...while driving today I heard of a study (I believe somewhere in CA but I missed that part) that found over 50% of homeless had had issues of domestic violence or sexual abuse/assault). There have also been some studies related to the fires here over the past few years. And of course we all know of the opioid epidemic fueled by the Pharma companies.

As to mandatory treatment... it's sadly not a real solution. For mental health you can't, outside of inpatient treatment, *make* someone take their meds. And addiction... we all know, it's a waste of resources and money unless someone is wanting to quit.

And I'll say, the one thing I haven't heard much discussion of- is which portion of the homeless population is transitory. I know it grows in winter- when long term homeless flee colder/wetter states. And... so does our concern/outrage. For most of the year the problem is much more dispersed, and there is little pressure on government to do anything. And then in winter, the populations tend to both huddle together and need more services such as warming stations... so it becomes more of an issue.

[juna]

No, the other group offers no solutions only complaints and stating they do not want sanctioned encampments anywhere.
I believe the Ninth Circuit Court just recently made a ruling that people living on public land could not be removed unless suitable accommodations were made. So if this 'other' group opposes encampments. do they have proposals for other accommodations?

[tommy]

I went to a Homeless Action! meeting in December. A small book called "The Blue Book on Homelessness" (available on Amazon) by Santa Rosa resident Terry Rowan was passed around. He details the causes of homelessness, and what has caused inaction. Terry proposes a nonprofit to: rent empty bedrooms, put tiny houses in yards, convert garages to studios, and allow vehicle parking for travel trailers.

All those seeking housing would be vetted by the nonprofit, and services provided when necessary. The nonprofit would be a clearing-house matching those needing housing, with those providing it. Costs would be shared, financed, or donated, from public and private sources. Terry states the 2000 homeless in Santa Rosa could be housed in 5 years.

This is a good plan to tackle homelessness. Parts of this plan are already being implemented, with a relaxation of codes for Accessory Dwelling Units.


Tomas--- following up on my comment, above, that would be a great idea-- if it works. Keep in mind that, as you know, a very large number of the homeless have mental & emotional problems, drug & alcohol problems, etc. Even the fact that a lot of them might smoke tobacco would likely be a problem with lots of people who might otherwise be willing to rent a room. Living in someone's home or even on their property is a very personal thing--- often hard enough to do with "regular" folks. And, after 30 days, the person becomes a "tenant" with full tenant's rights. Please let that sink in.

Not that I'm against the idea--- I'm actually totally for it. Just let's be realistic about it. If 10% of the homeless get housed through this, that's great. There is likely not one solution, but many--- so let's implement each one. (I also recall that, at one point, the County was asking people if there were someone-- a relative or friend--- who would house them if they could get there--- it turned out that something like 5-10% said "yes" and the County paid their bus fare to go live with the relative.)

[Lilith Rogers]

I like many of the ideas presented here and I certainly hope the county will act on them soon. I do find it distressing that you conclude by saying that if these ideas are followed, "the 2000 homeless here would be housed within 5 years." That's an awfully long time to be without a home for many of these home free folks, isn't it? I hope we can come up with a solution much sooner than that.

[rossmen]

I think a large part of homelessness being more of a problem is the increasing commodification of our world. There are fewer places to be economically different. Hopefully this will change as we all struggle to adapt. I have luck plus hard work to hold space in a cruel world for compassion. I called and emailed today about moms in Oakland. When i walk the trail, of course i do it with beer in hand while talking to myself, no problem.

[cyberanvil]

Supervisors on the march. Against local opposition, the County forges ahead.

<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
Supervisors select Sonoma Valley campus to take homeless residents from Santa Rosa trail camp (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10586272-181/supervisors-select-sonoma-valley-campus?sba=AAS)
TYLER SILVY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT January 14, 2020, 9:07PM

Sonoma County supervisors on Tuesday voted to relocate dozens of residents in the sprawling homeless camp in west Santa Rosa to county land on the east side of the city, across from the Oakmont senior community, setting up a showdown with vocal neighbors who fiercely objected to the move.

Board Chairwoman Susan Gorin, who represents eastern Sonoma County, including Oakmont, was adamantly opposed to use of the Los Guilicos juvenile justice campus off Highway 12 for a temporary shelter.

But she was outflanked 4-1, as the board majority, led by supervisors Lynda Hopkins and Shirlee Zane, voted to place in Gorin’s district the county’s lone sanctioned homeless camp.

“We have to make a decision today,” Hopkins said at the beginning of the board session, describing in dark terms the human suffering that’s rippled out from the growing Joe Rodota Trail camp in her district. “Or it will be another month of trench foot, fires and fear.”Supervisors on the march. Against local opposition, the County forges ahead.

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10586272-181/supervisors-select-sonoma-valley-campus?sba=AAS)

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
Supervisors select Sonoma Valley campus to take homeless residents from Santa Rosa trail camp (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10586272-181/supervisors-select-sonoma-valley-campus?sba=AAS)
TYLER SILVY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT January 14, 2020, 9:07PM

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10586272-181/supervisors-select-sonoma-valley-campus?sba=AAS)
First- I want to warn people that the PD has seemingly switched to a 1 free article per month paywall (caveat- this may be only for people like me who use a private browsing mode- I haven't tested)

But...let's see here:

This is meant to be temporary- in theory opening the end of this month and closing at the end of April (conveniently enough when the weather turns nicer and the homeless tend to disperse more widely...out of sight out of mind).

The article is short on details, such as whether the $2 million price tag is a hard limit or, like most government endeavors, will balloon it cost. It states the Catholic charity St Vincent De Paul has been contracted to oversee it, without any real details of how much they are being paid.

It also states that this is for 60 homeless (assuming they can convince 60 to leave the JRT encampments. That is- depending on the numbers you believe, somewhat more...or less...than 1/4 of the JRT population.

But let's look at this. $2 million dollars for 3 months. Thats $666,666.66 per month. Thats $22,222.22 per day. That $370.37 per person, per day. Let me say that again- THATS $370.37 PER DAY FOR EACH PERSON.
Now, I'm no rocket scientist... but I can tell you quite a few of our local homeless currently stay at well over a half dozen motels in Santa Rosa and Rohnert park for about $75-85 night. Some of which even have kitchenettes. Often less if booked for several days. And often split between, ahem, 2-4 people, If we go with the counties number of 220 people at the JRT encampments, we could give them ALL $101.01 a day for the same time period.

Sorry- I'll be the first to admit I'm a grumpy old bastard. I'd like to believe the county is actually trying to do something right. But I feel they are just throwing money at a problem trying to appease some angry constituents, and thinking they just have to get through until spring when the problem, from a public visibility perspective, tends to resolve itself. Until next winter at least. But I don't think anyone is going to see a reduction of 220 to 160 on the JRT as "problem solved". Or even "problem addressed". And I still don't hear any real discussion of addressing either the root causes of homelessness...or solutions, beyond some convenient lip service

edit to add- latest reporting is they've only cotton 48 people to agree to move- I'll leave it to you to redo the math on the costs and the impact on the JRT population...

[luke32]

Points well taken. Why not a letter to the editor of the PD? I bet it would be printed. And why not subscribe to the PD and help keep journalism flourishing? 39¢ a day. I bet you can afford that.


First- I want to warn people that the PD has seemingly switched to a 1 free article per month paywall (caveat- this may be only for people like me who use a private browsing mode- I haven't tested)

But...let's see here:

[Farmer Lynda]

Just a clarification... the $2M will fund the current emergency/interim outdoor shelter, PLUS two longer term outdoor shelters (which will pick up when Los Guilicos closes at the end of the April, and hopefully also add capacity). The request for proposals for additional outdoor shelters is active right now.


...
But let's look at this. $2 million dollars for 3 months. Thats $666,666.66 per month. Thats $22,222.22 per day. That $370.37 per person, per day. Let me say that again- THATS $370.37 PER DAY FOR EACH PERSON. ...

[rossmen]

Assuming that concentrated encampments of homeless people disperse as the weather warms does not fit historical patterns in Santa Rosa. The majority of homeless campers now in sonoma county are disbursed. The ones in Roseland like that location. The people who have agreed to move to Oakmont are the most vulnerable, wanting and needing more county services. The rest will try to stay close to where they are now.

I was talking recently to a lawyer who works with housed poeple close to the jrt. Restraining orders against specific campers, the ones tossing piss and crap over fences, being threatening and confrontational, have helped a bit. The lawyer doesn't understand why the city and county have not been more proactive in enforcing laws on drugs, property crime and violence on the trail. The 1000ft restraining orders probably just moved the recipients east of stonypoint.

[finnie]

absolutely!
and the sonoma developmental center is a perfect place to do it.


The county has $11m to spend to help? This is what we need to be doing. Check out this amazing community project in Austin TX. We have plenty of land here in SoCo to do something like this.

Let s do something real and lasting, not just shuffle them to another parking lot somewhere.

Community First! Village (https://mlf.org/community-first/)

[Dustyg]

Fantastic plan. I clicked on the Community First! Village (https://mlf.org/community-first/) and was really amazed and inspired by what they are doing. I hope we can do something similar to show our chronically homeless that we care and want them to have a place to live that they can call home.

[foxrosie]

thank you for mentioning this Community First! Village (https://mlf.org/community-first/) . I've been reading about it (it's outside of Austin, started by someone with Church backing) and it sounds AMAZING. I was praying that something like that would happen here. I think would could get tremendous local enthusiasm for something modeled on what they've done there.

[Stargazer]

The Sonoma Development Center (SDC) is the perfect place to to do a planned community like Community First in Austin. SDC is vacant with many empty buildings on 820 acres in its own town of Eldridge. Currently the county is spending over $2 million dollars to do EIR studies. More wasted dollars. Just another scam. I wish as a community, we could stand together and force our state and county representatives to open this facility immediately. I am guessing that it could house 3,000 people and many more while offering lots of services that are desperately needed.

[karenm97]

Some great quotes about the work that would need to be done are in this article. Dozens of millions of dollars of work would need to be done on the whole place? Maybe parts of the place could be ok, but how to keep people from exploring the unsafe spots?

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2020-01-21_13-58-10.png
(part of the Press Democrat Network)
Sonoma Developmental Center quietly closes its doors (https://www.sonomanews.com/news/9122373-181/sonoma-developmental-center-quietly-closes?sba=AAS)
December 31, 2018


The Sonoma Development Center (SDC) is the perfect place ...

[occihoff]

But what should they do with their piss and crap? Just keep it on their side of the fence?


... Restraining orders against specific campers, the ones tossing piss and crap over fences, being threatening and confrontational, have helped a bit. ..

[Barry]

<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
14 answers to frequently asked questions about Sonoma County's homeless
(https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10583153-181/14-answers-to-frequently-asked)

(Here are just the charts from this excellent article - See the full article here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10583153-181/14-answers-to-frequently-asked))


https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2020-01-22_15-31-59.png



https://www.pressdemocrat.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=Gyyr$d6Ci0DJOd3uju8OJ8$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYskpBMdRIFneEEAVAAWiq53WCsjLu883Ygn4B49Lvm9bPe2QeMKQdVeZmXF$9l$4 uCZ8QDXhaHEp3rvzXRJFdy0KqPHLoMevcTLo3h8xh70Y6N_U_CryOsw6FTOdKL_jpQ-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg



https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2020-01-22_15-37-05.png



https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2020-01-22_15-37-56.png

[Barry]

The Sonoma Development Center (SDC) is the perfect place to to do a planned community like Community First in Austin. SDC is vacant with many empty buildings on 820 acres in its own town of Eldridge..

There's more info about the Sonoma Development Center on the county's website here (https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/PRMD/Long-Range-Plans/Sonoma-Developmental-Center/)

[cyberanvil]

More information.
I would encourage everyone to read the Sonoma County HOMELESS CENSUS & SURVEY COMPREHENSIVE REPORT PRODUCED BY ASR2019 You can download this (and other) reports here (https://srcity.org/Search?searchPhrase=HOMELESS%20CENSUS%20%26%20SURVEY%20COMPREHENSIVE%20REPORT%20REPORT%20PRODUCED%20BY%20ASR%202019)

[Farmer Lynda]

Reposted from Lynda Hopkin's Facebook page :waccosun:
48727For 60 Joe Rodota Trail residents, this is what the future looks like.

For the half-million people who live in Sonoma County, this is what innovative, first-in-the-state solutions look like.

For the hundreds of County employees, non-profit partners, and community volunteers who have been working around the clock and through the holidays and at our Emergency Operations Center to try to generate urgent solutions to our ongoing homelessness crisis... this is what the result of hard work and collaboration looks like.

A few facts about the Los Guilicos Village project:

7 days ago, the parking lot at Los Guilicos was just that — a parking lot. Today, it is a tiny house village with more than 50 single occupancy units, a shower trailer, a triple-yard dog run (complete with gravel to prevent muddy paws), a shipping container for storage of personal belongings, port-a-potties, picnic tables (made by hand by our local probation camp residents), and a freshly poured cement pad that will soon host a Navigation Center trailer. The final few housing units will arrive tomorrow; they are dual occupancy units to allow families to stay together.

Sonoma County is the first jurisdiction in California to deploy Pallet Shelters to create a village for homeless residents. And as the Pallet Shelter staff said, “nobody anywhere has done it faster.” (Who knew local government could build an entire neighborhood in 7 days?!)

Pallet shelters cost $4,000-$7,000 each (depending on size/model), and are created by formerly homeless or incarcerated workers. They offer a simple but dignified shelter with heat, lights, and electricity. Importantly, they provide homeless residents with a safe place to live and to store their belongings. One of the biggest challenges with living out of a tent is the fact that when you leave the tent, your belongings are likely to get stolen, which makes it difficult to seek job opportunities, social services, or even go to obtain food. This shelter solves that problem.

48728Importantly, we do not want residents to stay in these units forever. This is a pilot project expected to run for 3 months; during this time, we will be accepting proposals from community based organizations and developers for longer-term village shelter sites. We will continue to work to find residents permanent housing solutions, and after three months will transfer remaining residents to a new site. We hope to establish two separate sites: one site will re-use these Pallet Shelters, and an additional site would utilize yet-to-be-determined structures.

Finally, we know that there are more than 60 people on the Joe Rodota Trail, and the Los Guilicos Village will not hold them all. However, our awesome Interdepartmental Multidisciplinary Team members are out there on the Joe Rodota Trail every day offering other housing and shelter solutions to homeless residents in order to achieve the goal of clearing the encampment by the end of the month. We know that a homeless encampment does not belong on the Joe Rodota Trail, and I understand the frustration, anger, and fear in the adjacent neighborhoods.

Please know that we are all working around the clock on THIS. On SOLUTIONS. On creative, innovative models of addressing homelessness... on initiatives that can bring much-needed HOPE to our community... and a HOME, however modest, for our homeless residents.

PS: Cheerios did not pay anyone for that shameless product placement. 😉

[Thad]

As a thing to think about for a pilot program is to have an option a person can get financed or work to own their shelter if they like it, and have the means to transport it to another site of their choosing. Pride of ownership is a big thing. Replace the shelter when one moves out. Congrats for a workable prototype.


Reposted from Lynda Hopkin's Facebook page :waccosun:
For 60 Joe Rodota Trail residents, this is what the future looks like.

[Mayacaman]

Here's a piece of Bad News. Can this event be reversed? How about a re-run?

‘Right to Housing’ Bill Dies Mysteriously in California Capitol. What Happened? (http://homelessperspective.com/2020/01/24/right-to-housing-bill-dies-mysteriously-in-california-capitol-what-happened/)

[Mayacaman]

Grist for the Mill


Have you noticed yet that the political establishment does a little two-step on the Homeless issue? First, the Democrats and the Republicans play soccer with the Blame Game, kicking that ball back & forth...

=OR= it’s the Feds versus the States, each Party shifting the Blame to the Other…

Then, one side makes a move that looks positive. And then, they back-track. They seem to think that the public won't notice their moves when they pull the plug after they make their promises. After all, they have better uses for the Money. -And besides- the Homeless are "the dregs of society."

=OR= If the Money IS allocated - & sometimes it is many millions of dollars - somehow it always gets siphoned off and not much that is tangible is left to show for all those $$. "Homelessness" is a real Cash Cow for the Bureaucracy. That's why it's called the "Homeless Industrial Complex."

Let's be vocal enough to let the politicians know that they are being watched. Yes, let’s let them know that we are watching them while do their little dance. –And that we are hip to the real reason for the two-step. Meanwhile, folks are freezing to death on the streets of our cities.

Meanwhile, the bi-partisan Jokers on Capital Hill - now at loggerheads - just a few months past were enough in agreement to approve a Military Budget for 2020 (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=military+budget+2020&t=osx&ia=images) that is, to put it mildly, Way Big: 738 Billion $$ (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=military+budget+2020%2C+738+billion&t=osx)for the Department of Defense alone. What is wrong with this picture?

We, the Public, need a permanent Solution to both the Housing Crisis & the Homeless Crisis = Which are the two sides of the same coin. I'll say it again: The Bureau of Land Management is sitting on over two hundred and forty-five million [ 245 , 000 , 000 ] acres of "Public Lands" in twelve Western States.

Does the BLM really care about "Conservation (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Land%22+%2C+%22BLM%22+%2C+%22conservation%22&t=osx&ia=web)" ? Is that the Real Reason (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Land%22+%2C+%22BLM%22+%2C+%22Revenue%22+%22Money%22+&t=osx&ia=web) why the Lands that were once, formerly known as the "Public Domain (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Land%22+%2C+%22Public+Domain%22+%2C+%22Land+Office%22&t=osx&ia=web)" were closed to Homesteading in 1976 (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22Land%22+%2C+%22BLM%22+%2C+%22Homestead+Act+of+1862%22++%2C+%221976%22&t=osx&ia=web) ? Ponder the Question. Study the Issue.

[Barry]

From News of the North Bay (https://newsofthenorthbay.com/):



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTHLha0Joq4&feature=youtu.be

[karenm97]

I love how he thinks that only housed people deserve health and safety. "our safety and well being is at risk"

As bad as it is for the homeowners, at least they don't sleep outside and have had power and running water, trash disposal, possibly health care, and, hopefully, regular meals this whole time.

Wow we have an angry "child of government" ...

[wisewomn]

This article is in today's Press Democrat:

<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
As Santa Rosa homeless camp grew, frustrated residents flooded government leaders with emails
(https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10622779-181/as-santa-rosa-homeless-camp)

[Barry]

http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2018-08-24_17-48-38.png (http://www.sonomawest.com/)
Part 2: Lynda Hopkins and the crisis of homelessness
(http://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_west_times_and_news/news/part-lynda-hopkins-and-the-crisis-of-homelessness/article_861cedac-416d-11ea-92dc-6b29a17ff71e.html)By Laura Hagar Rush, Sonoma West Editor, [email protected] Jan 27, 2020

This is part two of a two-part profile on Fifth District Supervisor Lynda Hopkins, who is running for a second term in the upcoming election on March 3. Find part 1, "Lynda Hopkins’ first term was a trial by fire and flood (http://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_west_times_and_news/news/lynda-hopkins-first-term-was-a-trial-by-fire-and/article_967d4714-3d44-11ea-accc-e3365a763290.html)," Jan. 22, 2020, at sonomawest.com.

48755Lynda Hopkins has been wrestling with the problem of homelessness ever since she became Fifth District supervisor four years ago — first along the Russian River and now along the Joe Rodota Trail. If elected for another term, she says dealing with homelessness will be her first priority, followed by climate change and infrastructure improvements.

Early in her term, Hopkins worked hard on the homeless problem in Guerneville, even wading in with rubber boots and gloves to help clean up encampments before the rains washed everything into the Russian River. In addition to this hands-on approach, she worked closely with local homelessness agencies and looked into purchasing a property to house the river’s homeless population. (Neighborhood resistance to this latter idea proved impossible to overcome.)

“I’m proud of the investment that we made in addressing homelessness in the lower Russian River,” she said. “We’ve seen a 20% decline in homelessness in that area since I’ve been in office, despite floods and fires. That is really the result of working very closely with the community and with our service providers and investing $1 million in one-time funds to try to address what was a crisis when I walked into office.”

She also took the lead on the dispersal of a homeless encampment that popped up in the Park & Ride at the corner of Mirabel and River Road in Forestville.

“Obviously though, the homelessness crisis continues and has become very, very visible in western Santa Rosa again in recent months,” she said, referring to the large encampment on the Joe Rodota Trail, which the county planned to clear on Wednesday, Jan. 29 (after press time).

Continues here (http://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_west_times_and_news/news/part-lynda-hopkins-and-the-crisis-of-homelessness/article_861cedac-416d-11ea-92dc-6b29a17ff71e.html)

[seedavelee]

I am glad to read this article (the full article) as it explains the complications of homelessness without a policy in place on any level of government (local, state and federal). It also reveals what happens on a local level when our elected officials are slow to act, in this case Lynda Hopkins. It further explains just how committed she is, what she has done in other areas of the county and now what is happening with the Joe Rodota trail homelessness (encampments gone in a couple of days with a solution for where the homeless there can go). In a way I see this is a good illustration of what happens with so many problems when community seriously gets involved, the "heat" that is generated and real solutions come to light.


http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2018-08-24_17-48-38.png (http://www.sonomawest.com/)
Part 2: Lynda Hopkins and the crisis of homelessness
(http://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_west_times_and_news/news/part-lynda-hopkins-and-the-crisis-of-homelessness/article_861cedac-416d-11ea-92dc-6b29a17ff71e.html)By Laura Hagar Rush, Sonoma West Editor, [email protected] Jan 27, 2020

Continues here (http://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_west_times_and_news/news/part-lynda-hopkins-and-the-crisis-of-homelessness/article_861cedac-416d-11ea-92dc-6b29a17ff71e.html)

[luke32]

Recent PD articles on JRT Homeless crisis:


<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
Clearing of Santa Rosa homeless encampment off to a slow start (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10627225-181/clearing-of-santa-rosa-homeless)
The journey of a thousand miles begins, according to a Chinese proverb, with a single step.

The emptying of the sprawling, unsanitary homeless encampment on Santa Rosa’s Joe Rodota Trail began Sunday with a similarly modest feat.

Declared a homeless emergency by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors in mid-December, the 2-mile long tent city was a muddy, rat-infested home to some 250 people. By sundown on Sunday, nine of them had upgraded to their own, private tiny house in a camp some 9 miles east.

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10627225-181/clearing-of-santa-rosa-homeless)

<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
Sonoma County set to start clearing Joe Rodota Trail camp as judge considers compliance (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10643391-181/sonoma-county-set-to-start)
Sonoma County plans to start clearing homeless people camped along the Joe Rodota Trail in west Santa Rosa on Wednesday morning, after a federal judge said Tuesday he will not stop the sweep.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, who last summer issued an injunction requiring authorities to provide written notice and offer shelter before sweeping encampments, wrote in a preliminary decision Tuesday that he was “tentatively of the view that it would be not appropriate for the Court to adjudicate the question of compliance (with that injunction) before the encampment is cleared.”

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10643391-181/sonoma-county-set-to-start)

[cyberanvil]

Yea! Success is within sight. Now when those other 211 people buy in, we can all pat ourselves on the back and get to work on the other 2800 homeless in Sonoma County.

[Mayacaman]

Yea! Success is within sight. Now when those other 211 people buy in, we can all pat ourselves on the back and get to work on the other 2800 homeless in Sonoma County.

I spoke with a homeless soul yesterday after the meeting who showed up at the weekly Homeless Action (https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/homeless-action-sonoma-county/B1E2545F-92B4-4BC0-B504-D3C63289D909%40gmail.com) ! meeting @ the Methodist Church on Montgomery Avenue in Santa Rosa. He had a bicycle, and stated "This is all I have in the world."

When I asked him if he also had a sleeping bag or a tent somewhere, he said, "No." He informed me that there are probably ten thousand homeless people in Sonoma County. Many of them don't have tents, and many wander around at night, until they can find a place to lie down... He said sometimes he travels on his bike all night long. The physical exertion keeps him warm.

Do I believe him? Are there really ten thousand homeless people in Sonoma County? I don't know; he is a wild man who rants about "Capitalism!" being the root of the problem. But I tell you what: because he "walks the walk" he is in a better position to have an accurate grasp of the real numbers of Homeless in Sonoma County than either the City Council or the Board of Supes.

This problem is so enormous. We really need to step back and consider the parameters of it. The social fabric in the Western Hemisphere is hemorrhaging; the System is breaking down - before our very eyes. On Sunday, I was informed firsthand by someone from Vancouver, B.C., that - in the present - there are big tent cities in Vancouver. - And all across Canada also, on account of the astronomical rise in the cost of Rent.



Perhaps the madman on the bicycle is right; the problem is Capitalism

[occihoff]

I'm inclined to agree with the madman on the bicycle. Does Europe, which if I'm not mistaken is much more socialistic, have such homelessness? How about Canada? I'm truly asking; I don't really know.



I spoke with a homeless soul yesterday after the meeting who showed up at the weekly Homeless Action (https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/homeless-action-sonoma-county/B1E2545F-92B4-4BC0-B504-D3C63289D909%40gmail.com) ! meeting @ the Methodist Church on Montgomery Avenue in Santa Rosa. He had a bicycle, and stated "This is all I have in the world." ...

[podfish]

This problem is so enormous. We really need to step back and consider the parameters of it. The social fabric in the Western Hemisphere is hemorrhaging; the System is breaking down - before our very eyes. On Sunday, I was informed firsthand by someone from Vancouver, B.C., that - in the present - there are big tent cities in Vancouver. - And all across Canada also, on account of the astronomical rise in the cost of Rent.

Perhaps the madman on the bicycle is right; the problem is Capitalism

for any social issue, I like to look back and see first, if it's really new; and second, what is different than what came before.

This one baffles me. We do have precedents; the Hoovervilles, for one. Hobos were a 'thing', as were Gypsies, etc. So pretty clearly we haven't historically done a great job of housing everyone. Half-seriously, maybe it's because KMart tents are only a few bucks, so now people can have shelter out where we can all see them. Maybe the cops used to run people off more effectively. Or maybe there really were fewer homeless people because rents were cheaper. But it's not like there's tons of unused housing that the poor can't afford. Or, maybe I'm wrong, is there? I know a lot of high-end properties sit empty, plus there are "investment properties" sitting open like the one in Oakland that's attracted such attention. I wouldn't expect that to be enough to account for the current situation.

[Mayacaman]

I'm inclined to agree with the madman on the bicycle. Does Europe, which if I'm not mistaken is much more socialistic, have such homelessness? How about Canada? I'm truly asking; I don't really know.

Richard, aka occihoff, Here is the results of a web search I just did spinning the words "homelessness, canada, 2019 (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=homelessness%2C+canada%2C+2019&t=osx&iax=videos&ia=videos)" in the search box @ DuckDuckGo [Don't Google] These are the videos. To read about it, just go up to the top of the page, and under the search box, select "Web"

And here is the data for the corollary search: "homelessness, europe, 2019 (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=homelessness%2C+europe%2C+2019&t=osx&iar=videos&iax=videos&ia=videos)" :



Frankly, I think the madman on the bicycle is a Seer

[rossmen]

Looks like Stuart has been xed out. To bad, he was the most consistent and local wacco to the jrt. What he didn't get was that there are homeless campers in sebtown and graton. What he did get is that the encampment near stonypoint and 12th is Lynda Hopkins 4th baby, she has the most ineffectual power of any local pol to deal with it, and while she has tried hard, so far she has failed. So to complain about her, to start a recall, is about the best any one citizen can do. The only thing else we can do is go there and give stuff. Yesterday I walked the trail, mostly to see how big it has grown, and assess county shutdown effort. I handed some cash to a young man beyond the last visible tent west because he asked as I was petting his very sweet pit. We talked about tenting there as I wondered why say couldn't help him.

[DavidMySky]

As I was reading this line, I thought, sure, I'll watch it. But as soon as I scrolled down and saw the name Dinesh D'Souza, I said, oh, hell no! Fox Entertainment AND D'Souza?! Nope, no, just no, no way. TLDR, or should I say TLDW (didn't watch.)


I get that many people suffer from homelessness, and I finally had to weigh in on this long discussion.

Please try to overcome any inherent prejudice towards Fox News and watch this analysis with an open mind. It details the problem at a meta level.

[ray50sfo]

So sad to see a mind closed by a name, unable to consider an idea because of prejudice. Oh well, such is life. And we wonder why nothing changes...


As I was reading this line, I thought, sure, I'll watch it. But as soon as I scrolled down and saw the name Dinesh D'Souza, I said, oh, hell no! Fox Entertainment AND D'Souza?! Nope, no, just no, no way. TLDR, or should I say TLDW (didn't watch.)

[DavidMySky]

Sorry, no not really, but the reputations of Fox Entertainment, (the brain rotting network with the most godawful truthfulness rating compared to real news sources,) and a trump bootlicking sycophantic RWNJ precedes themselves by miles.

Prejudiced? Against blind trump supporters who refuse to see the years of work the next POTUS will have to do to un#u@/< what this treasonous  has done to this country and our standing in the world? In this case, you're damn straight I'm prejudiced.

https://www.salon.com/2016/10/21/dinesh-dsouza-adulterous-felon-and-disgraced-academic-has-hit-a-new-low/

[podfish]

So sad to see a mind closed by a name, unable to consider an idea because of prejudice. Oh well, such is life. And we wonder why nothing changes...there is a reason that in a society, people do concern themselves with their reputations and strive to maintain a good one. Fox doesn't have a good one, for excellent reasons. Note the previous poster's not unwilling to consider the idea, but he is unwilling to sit through a video based on one endorsement when his previous experience with the source was so poor.

I know it's an easy way to argue on the interwebs and all, but posting links to sources that have a reputation of being strongly ideological, that don't have any counterbalancing virtues (like, say, intellectual rigor) isn't a great way to actually change anyone's mind.

[Mayacaman]

Because I am subscribed to the Homeless Action Google Group (https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!msg/homeless-action-sonoma-county/VC53ZdloO7I/diWZtDRGFQAJ), {you can, too} I received the following missive in the newsfeed: A Letter to the Supes from the Oracle on the Bicycle:


My letter to the Santa Rosa Board of Supervisors..
Board of Supervisors,

A homeless emergency exists, a comprehensive Homeless solution must be implemented. To this point all efforts, ideas and programs, have been band aids, on an infected wound, where antibiotics are required, leaving the wound to fester. The Supervisors should prioritize working on a comprehensive Homeless solution.

Ideally, the solution should have the Un Sheltered independently, as a cooperative entity, owning and providing shelter with and for other Homeless people. Often times, when funds are allocated, the groups who are given the responsibility of facilitating shelter, have their own agenda and although they claim, it's not enough, somehow they acquire properties and other resources that the Homeless never see.

These are people, people do not get swept, we sweep garbage. We should NOT forcibly remove people living on county property till housing is secured for each and every person. Immediately commence creating adequate shelters for all of Sonoma County's 10,000 un sheltered residents. Stop playing politics with people's lives by rejecting potential shelter sites based on Supervisors' fears of not being electable if a shelter is built in their district; make decisions about shelter locations based on access to services and safety and dignity for the shelter residents.

Include un housed people in the planning process for each shelter so that their needs, priorities, and perspectives are at the forefront in decision making to ensure success Take drastic steps to address the systemic causes that lead to homelessness like affordable housing, inequality, fair wages

Regards,
Eddie Campagnola

Homeless Author of, "Directions to the Dumpster"

<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-alt:"Times New Roman"; mso-font-charset:77; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:auto; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Georgia; panose-1:2 4 5 2 5 4 5 2 3 3; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;}</style>

[bakerchic]

I don't think Fox is being pre-judged. It's not prejudice if an opinion or actions are based on another person's decade-long history of a certain position which they have never disavowed. Fox "News" has a position that doesn't and has never aligned with mine. I feel no obligation to listen to anymore of their opinions. If you know someone who has punched you in the gut for the past 10 years, and they invite you over for a visit, are you going? I wouldn't. I can rightly say, without being accused of being "prejudiced," that their past behavior has influenced my opinion of them and I want to have nothing to do with them. That is not prejudice, it is opinion and action based on my knowledge of them. Someone should be able to act on the knowledge they have received about something without being called prejudiced.


So sad to see a mind closed by a name, unable to consider an idea because of prejudice. Oh well, such is life. And we wonder why nothing changes...

[seedavelee]

I find this thread interesting. First, I'm one to look at where the title is coming from before I open it and get further involved. It took me a while - like years to learn this while browsing on the internet. A few of you who have posted here about Fox News or Entertainment, I too have a pretty strong negative bias against them. In saying this, is it wrong to completely dismiss what this woman (contributor) on Fox has to say? She may have some important input or a helpful suggestion with regard to remedies for homelessness. Possibly? Maybe the best argument for not opening the article, video, or whatever her offering is, is "I don't extend my time (which is limited) to a view that likely won't resonate with mine related to our discussion and hopeful remedy to our local homelessness".

[finnie]

Here's something interesting about Fox news - i abhor the national programs but lo and behold, it turns out that Fox 2 San Francisco is capable of some very good reporting on local issues. Reporter Deborah Villalon usually tells it like it is (but not 100% and not always but definitely worth listening to.


I don't think Fox is being pre-judged. It's not prejudice if an opinion or actions are based on another person's decade-long history of a certain position which they have never disavowed. ...

[podfish]

Here's something interesting about Fox news - i abhor the national programs but lo and behold, it turns out that Fox 2 San Francisco is capable of some very good reporting on local issues. Reporter Deborah Villalon usually tells it like it is (but not 100% and not always but definitely worth listening to.like everything else, it gets complicated. Overall I think they're a big factor in destroying civil society, but other than that, they have some redeeming qualities. There certainly are some skilled reporters there, several of whom are actually good at challenging those they interview regardless of ideology. They'd be able to fit into any msm outfit. Their network broadcasts more than just shows populated by right-wing wackos, sycophants, and blondes in tight dresses, though they have more of all the above than any other media outlet that I can think of. They have the Simpsons, for god's sake. Murdoch is pretty willing to show anything that makes a buck, but he doesn't want to alienate the Fox loyalists by making it easy for them to encounter something disturbing to them. Local stations, affiliated with Fox, are a much more varied bunch.

but they still claim the Australian fires are caused by arsonists and the fact that lefties won't sweep the forests.

[Barry]

<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>http://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/keep90days/2015-10-04_15-56-29.png
Sonoma County officials move toward clearing Joe Rodota Trail

(https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10647029-181/sonoma-county-officials-move-toward)MARY CALLAHAN AND NASHELLY CHAVEZ
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT January 29, 2020, 1:35PM

48760Sonoma County authorities began easing homeless campers off the Joe Rodota Trail in Santa Rosa on Wednesday with verbal warnings that will transition to citations and, potentially, arrests by week’s end if need be, officials said.

County representatives said they hope no arrests are necessary — that when the Friday deadline hits, after weeks’ of advance notice, those who have been living along the public trail will leave willingly, on their own, as they have with previous camp sweeps.

The county hopes to have all residents off the trail by then so they can begin cleaning the parkland of debris and filth that accumulated during the six-month encampment.

But there remains enough clear resistance among the estimated 250 people who still call it home that a voluntary exodus is not guaranteed.

In that case, county park rangers will be prepared to make arrests, Sonoma County Parks Director Bert Whitaker said.

“The spirit of this is certainly that it’s our absolutely last resort, (but) we’ve made arrangements to be able to do so, and park rangers have the authority to do so,” he said.

Continues here (https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/10647029-181/sonoma-county-officials-move-toward)

[DavidMySky]

I wrote that, as I was reading his post, I would watch the video despite it coming from Fox (don't call it news) Entertainment, but then I scrolled down a bit furthur and saw D'Souza's name. I was not going to fall for a double fake news whammy of Fox and D'Souza. That would be too much toxic waste to consume in a lifetime.


I find this thread interesting. ..

[DavidMySky]

The one tent that really caught my attention was the two story condo with the central heating. I figure if he refuses to leave, the building inspector could come and red tag him, 'cuz that place is definitely not up to code.

[79paul]

1. I've been in Vancouver twice in the last 2 months, and there are not the number of homeless that there are in the Bay area, for a number of reasons. Better health care for all (No medical bankruptcies), better mental health outreach, etc. Whoever told you such a tale is exaggerating.

2. Your friend on the bike is also probably also pulling numbers out of thin air. The Homeless count that goes on every year (was due to happen on Jan 29, but postponed due to the current emergency), now scheduled for end of February, does a very good job of physically counting all the unhoused in the county on a single morning. Involving hundreds of volunteers plus paid homeless (who know the places where people sleep) cover every foot of the county on a single day. Don't believe it? https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CDC/Homeless-Services/Homeless-Count/ check out the data, or better yet, volunteer to help with the count.

PS the current best guess for 2019 is just under 3000. Still a horrendous number, unacceptable on many levels, but the tone of your post is too alarmist. And yes, I too believe capitalism IS the problem.



...He informed me that there are probably ten thousand homeless people in Sonoma County. ...
... On Sunday, I was informed firsthand by someone from Vancouver, B.C., that - in the present - there are big tent cities in Vancouver. - And all across Canada also, on account of the astronomical rise in the cost of Rent.

[Shandi]

Seers have been considered "mad" but are now accepted in mainstream culture, and even sought out and paid for their services if successfully marketed.





Frankly, I think the madman on the bicycle is a Seer

[cyberanvil]

Mark Evans (aka Mayacaman) writes




This problem is so enormous. We really need to step back and consider the parameters of it. The social fabric in the Western Hemisphere is hemorrhaging; the System is breaking down - before our very eyes. On Sunday, I was informed firsthand by someone from Vancouver, B.C., that - in the present - there are big tent cities in Vancouver. - And all across Canada also, on account of the astronomical rise in the cost of Rent.
Perhaps much of what Ted Kaczynski said was correct when he wrote 'Industrial Society and Its Future.'

[cyberanvil]

I must admit that I haven't followed all the details of the Trail people relocation, but it seems lacking. Basically, the County is spending almost 12 million dollars to provide for 60 people and all the rest will be arrested if they don't skeedadle. Is this it in a nutshell?<style type="text/css">p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px 'Lucida Grande'}</style>