What to do about homelessness?

The conversation on the homeless & Courthouse Square is complex, and difficult, with no easy answers. I notice at the Starbucks on 4th St, the tables and chairs that used to be outside, have been removed - I think because homeless used to occupy them for hours at a time. The 2nd St Post Office is no longer open during the night, as homeless started staying there at night, causing security and sanitary problems.

I read how the residents of Guerneville voted against opening a homeless shelter at the 9 acre property on Armstrong Woods Road, in a public meeting. The article also stated that the residents were also opposed to West Co Comm Services employees voting - apparently they were in favor of a new homeless shelter.

It's easy to be in favor of a homeless shelter, unless you live nearby. There are many sides to homelessness. Not only compassion and caring for the homeless, and programs to help them find a home, but also the social and behavioral problems that often accompany them.

I often drive by Olive St Park in Santa Rosa. Usually the benches are filled with homeless, they're hanging out around the bathrooms. Due to that, I surmise that this is the last place that a woman would feel comfortable, to take her baby for a walk. The problem likely is that, the more services offered to the homeless, the more homeless will be drawn to the area.

I think it's important to recognize all the sides of this issue, so that we can respond with compassion and awareness.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

The conversation on the homeless & Courthouse Square is complex, and difficult, with no easy answers. ...

---

Some of these conditions will improve with the arrival of warmer weather. We have to own our homeless problem, and tolerance is a good beginning. I'm not surprised at businesses blanching at their presence, especially at those who do not clean up their messes. At one point I had no vehicle and had eye surgery (with the mandate to flush the eyes several times daily. I was unable to do so. Also, all my energy was consumed just trying to access and stand in line for the services I needed (mainly meals) By the end of the day I was exhausted just going to and fro.

In my opinion, if neighborhoods got to know each other; possibly with a block party or community picnic, and then take responsibility for ONE homeless person, offering encouragement, part time work, hope for a future off drugs or alcohol (often used to dull their pain or to get to sleep); THEN that community is owning this problem and finding creative solutions to solve it. We have the resources, but do we have the will.

Finally I'd like to call Guerneville's NIMBY citizens out on this issue. I attended the "Community Christmas " dinner there and during my whole meal the woman next to me complained about the "outsiders" living along the river and at various encampments. She ranted on and on about "these are not even our people". I know of at least one man who I was trying to encourage whose camp (not messy) was bulldozed into the mud during the rainy season losing all his possessions and driving him to drink more deeply. There are quite a few homeless there including homeless children. When West County Community Services had access to a large suitable property the NIMBYs raised hell purporting that children would be endangered on the way to school. This is not a valid fear and these folks need to look at the values they are conveying on said children. They have missed a golden opportunity to teach their children cooperation rather than fear.

Thank you to all the members of the community who are willing to step up and offer encouragement and a good word to and for the homeless. These are our mothers, our fathers and our children.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dorothy Friberg:

...Finally I'd like to call Guerneville's NIMBY citizens out on this issue. ...

---

If you are going to call out Guerneville as a NIMBY place you may as well have some more facts to consider. The lower River area has something like 250 plus homeless. Per capita that is 3 to 4 times the level San Francisco or Santa Rosa has. It has become much worse in the last few years. Violent crime and property crime is getting worse. Residents are afraid to go downtown, especially after dark. Our single ambulance is overused with homeless calls to the ER, leaving it unavailable for other emergencies. Law enforcement is inadequate and just today Sheriff Freitas announced really big cutbacks to the Guerneville substation. There are huge encampments along the River where volunteers have removed well over 100,000 pounds of garbage. The River and its banks are the dump and sewer for these encampments.

Guerneville does not possess the infrastructure and services needed for such a large population, most of whom are from elsewhere. Sebastopol is smugly silent, though WCCS in Sebastopol has in the past printed up a flyer encouraging the homeless to go to Guerneville. That's a bit NIMBY, don't you think?

A homeless shelter including the idea of giving these people something to do may help. Activities or chores (possibly with pay) within the shelter won't force them to wander around all day.
Help finding odd jobs outside, even if they're low-paying, will help alleviate the intense boredom that may accompany homelessness, and give them a few bucks in their pockets, making the need to panhandle less prevalent.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

The conversation on the homeless & Courthouse Square is complex, and difficult, with no easy answers. ...

---

There are pros & cons on the idea of part time jobs at a shelter. While it might lessen the boredom of the homeless, homeless shelters are not popular in neighborhoods, because they bring down the character of the neighborhood. What family with young kids would want to live next to a shelter?

I read in the "Russian River Times" today that Sup Hopkins said she will not pursue the purchase of any property as a homeless day service center in the lower Russian River at this time. It seems that that's in line with the sentiment of the community.

Homelessness is an intractable problem, defies solutions, and is getting worse. When I lived in San Francisco in the early 90s, there were homeless there, but I never saw any in visits to Santa Rosa and the Russian River Area. Obviously today, there are many homeless in Santa Rosa and the River Area.

I say the problem in intractable, because it's grown out of changes in our "hourglass" economy: disappearance of middle class manufacturing jobs, shortage of mental health resources, shortage of programs to help the homeless, increase in the cost of housing, etc... resulting in people dropping out & living in the streets.

Often the only thing I can do is offer kindness & spare change.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by robert777:

A homeless shelter including the idea of giving these people something to do may help. Activities or chores (possibly with pay) within the shelter won't force them to wander around all day.
Help finding odd jobs outside, even if they're low-paying, will help alleviate the intense boredom that may accompany homelessness, and give them a few bucks in their pockets, making the need to panhandle less prevalent.

---

Yes sebtown is successful in chasing out. Guerneville and roseland struggle to catch up, in chasing out street dwellers that is. I have just delt with superior court, 10k to deal with a tenants moldy mattress on the floor in an abundant winter. We live in an area rich, with enforcement, attraction and attitude. To depend on laws to service ignorant compassion is to bubble yourself up. So confusing, if one choses to think.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by jbox:

I...Sebastopol is smugly silent, though WCCS in Sebastopol has in the past printed up a flyer encouraging the homeless to go to Guerneville. That's a bit NIMBY, don't you think?

---

"intractable problem"???

$20 MILLION could only "buy a few houses", i.e. useless to help thousands people go from 'homeless and destitute' to housed, fed, working and well...

i disagree.

entirely a question of values and political will (determined by business interests rather than conscience).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

There are pros & cons on the idea of part time jobs at a shelter. While it might lessen the boredom of the homeless, homeless shelters are not popular in neighborhoods,....

Homelessness is an intractable problem, defies solutions, and is getting worse. ....
I say the problem in intractable, because it's grown out of changes in our "hourglass" economy: disappearance of middle class manufacturing jobs, shortage of mental health resources, shortage of programs to help the homeless, increase in the cost of housing, etc... resulting in people dropping out & living in the streets. .

---

I don't follow your train of thought from part-time jobs to shelters being unpopular in neighborhoods. I think those are two unrelated issues.

One thing relevant to both of your observations: that part-time jobs lessen boredom, and that there's an hourglass economy -- more and more people will have both issues. I don't see the hourglass going away. The number of people needed to run Facebook is a fraction of what it took to run GM. And when a general-purpose robot (look up "Baxter") can be bought for $30K (which they can't, yet) lots of jobs that are already at or below living wage will out-and-out disappear. As will lots of professional jobs. The 'basic guaranteed income' people are starting to get serious about doesn't quite work because too many traditional Americans don't feel valued/valuable without employment. So your first point: we're going to need part-time, make-do jobs that don't feel like that's what they are. And you second point is addressed by BGI plus some way to supplement it so people do have the ability for discretionary spending. I don't know how you get there from here, but it's either that or we may as well get Brazil to show us how to set up favelas.

Thank you for sharing your own experience and vulnerability.

I've always had a fantasy that if each (able) couple or family or intentional community would "adopt" one homeless person, giving them some responsibility, and some guidance, and sustenance, we could reduce the problem. I understand that no one wants alcoholics in their homes (unless they're "refined by wine") or drug addicts (unless it's prescription drugs). Many homeless people aren't addicts of any kind; but have lost jobs and then homes, and ultimately vehicles they couldn't afford to keep running. It's very hard to stay clean when you're living on the street. And living in shelters sometimes means sleeping alongside addicts, and those so desperate they'll steal from you. Another fact about shelters is that many religious ones will pressure people to take part in services that have no meaning to them.

I know of a friend and previous neighbor who was given notice a couple of months before me. She's a senior, and had been living with and care taking an alcoholic man. When he died, she moved in with the next door neighbor who was also an alcoholic man. They were both abusive, but she couldn't afford to pay much rent, so she was trapped. When she received notice in October, she started sleeping in her car, with her cat. She ate at Taco Bell, showered the gym, and used the library computer to look on Craigslist for other positions. During the months that she was living in her car, I had her over for dinner a few times, and she was so grateful that someone cared.

She finally found another live-in caretaker position, and was doing a job share with another woman. The other person wasn't pulling her weight, and my friend ended up doing the bulk of the work. The attempt at communication with the other woman failed. After a month of this, she took a leap and called a male acquaintance, who had said to call him if she ever needed help. He came to the rescue and moved her in to his home in Walnut Creek. Things looked pretty good, but didn't last long before he wanted sexual favors in exchange for housing. So, she packed up and moved on once again.

She ended up living in a Christian shelter, with her cat living in her car. She said it was the most horrible living experience she'd had. In order to stay there, she had to go along with the irrational rules, and the attempts at religious indoctrination. Many of the residents were addicts, and trusting anyone was a big mistake. She doesn't drink or do drugs, but fell into a deep depression.

She said that the only thing that kept her going was our connection through email and the phone. I was literally her lifeline to sanity.

Her recent email said that she'd found a room to rent, but the landlady was unpleasant. She's trying to make some connections with other women that are stable, and don't know of her past as a homeless woman. She's sure that they wouldn't want anything to do with her. And it seems to be a sad and disheartening fact.

I was given notice in Dec. 2016, and if it wasn't for the gracious invitation to stay on a friend's couch, I too would have been living in my car. The friend who offered me a place to stay didn't even know me that well, and some people who knew me, stopped communicating....maybe fearful of my new neediness.

I spent 5 months on that couch, and had to navigate long flights of stairs which were painful for my knees and hips, but I was thankful for the shelter and someone who cared enough to house me. She didn't even want me to go when I recently finally found a room to rent.

I've actually given shelter to several people in my lifetime when I was able to. Most were very grateful, and tried to give back; others took advantage. Sometimes all people need is to know that someone cares enough to reach out, with more than spare change. It's not without risk, but then life is risky, and we never know when we'll be on the side of the coin that means we lose. It can happen when we least expect it, and is happening every day in our county and beyond.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dorothy Friberg:

Some of these conditions will improve with the arrival of warmer weather. We have to own our homeless problem, and tolerance is a good beginning. ....

---

What a thoughtful, caring response to this thread... More than ever, we have to be there for each other, in whatever way we can. I have not been homeless, but have been too close at times and have given, shared, and received caring shelter from the heart.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Thank you for sharing your own experience and vulnerability....

---

Thanks for the comment, but I don't understand this as a reply to my post.I know shelters are not popular. I'm talking bout ideas concerning the operation of exiting shelters, or ones that may exist in the future.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

There are pros & cons on the idea of part time jobs at a shelter. While it might lessen the boredom of the homeless, homeless shelters are not popular in neighborhoods, because they bring down the character of the neighborhood. What family with young kids would want to live next to a shelter?

I read in the "Russian River Times" today that Sup Hopkins said she will not pursue the purchase of any property as a homeless day service center in the lower Russian River at this time. It seems that that's in line with the sentiment of the community.

Homelessness is an intractable problem, defies solutions, and is getting worse. When I lived in San Francisco in the early 90s, there were homeless there, but I never saw any in visits to Santa Rosa and the Russian River Area. Obviously today, there are many homeless in Santa Rosa and the River Area.

I say the problem in intractable, because it's grown out of changes in our "hourglass" economy: disappearance of middle class manufacturing jobs, shortage of mental health resources, shortage of programs to help the homeless, increase in the cost of housing, etc... resulting in people dropping out & living in the streets.

Often the only thing I can do is offer kindness & spare change.

---

i have been homeless or border line homeless for around 18 years; I have observed local homelessness closely,donated a few cubic yards of things to them. and ate and talked with ,picked up cigarette butts and had a sip of cheap beer with many.

I will offer you a different perspective,and many of you especially land owners and realtors with dislike it.

You are not having trouble managing citizens,you are having trouble managing your POLICE !

homeless folks naturally just like you or me do not want to be right under everyone’s nose on the sidewalk,but every time they build a nice place to stay in the woods or bushes the cops come and route them out. I have seen the cops and dicks near the smart train tracks bring in a back hoe and destroy their tents WITH their possessions inside! the cops made them all come out,clear away from the tents ,and then destroyed them and put it all in a dumpster.

they do this repeatedly,I talked to the cops they sited health concerns etc etc ,that does not excuse "Cruel and unusual punishment" NOTHING makes me madder than this I had to leave so I would not be arrested.
(and I agree camps should not be below high water line on the river)

like keith richards said about the stone's"We don't have a drug problem,we have a police problem"


those cops are working for the city council that is working for the realtor’s who are working for YOU, land owners and land buyers and wine growers who want a nice little pristine Beverly hills type W.Sonoma county. Welcome to sidewalk incarceration,for the crime of living life differently ,these people must sleep on hard cold sidewalks (YOU WANT TO CALL IT BORING!!) LOL got a blanket? go out for a night or two,and see how "bored" you are((take a bottle of Tokay,you will need it around 3 am)) . you could sell boring.

Why here? the HUMONGOUS quantities of wasted food in the dumpers here is staggering,thrift stores throw away hundreds of pounds of perfectly good items daily

our PROGRAMS (Food Bank,Redwood Gospel etc ) are good ,the weather is beautiful a lot of the time,a lot of the people are beautiful and friendly(YOU) so why NOT stay here. I know a bush the cops don't know about yet!!

So sorry no quick solutions here just yet... I am blessed I enjoy work and still can!

what if there was a homeless run Rural Waste management,recycle and compost humanure group
allow camps on unused property above water line,monitor for fire safety, clean and recycle all goods ,run simple humanure sawdust buckets (proven safe and effective if managed correctly in Sonoma county by ME.)

Small villages could have tool lockers that allowed for yard work in adjoining neighbourhoods , shopping cart trucks could deliver green waste to small local compost systems .

You might say that I'm a dreamer, but you are also wasting time and money(the county and cities do "studies " that cost ridiculous money ,bring in "experts" who talk of building houses((oh goodie,more realtors more money more contractors ) all for housing 5 more people (hopefully good Christian families with 2 1/2 children and no drugs booze or swearing... )
Tiny home village? maybe if you can vary Zoneing, and keep the home owners ass. from having a cow

so rage and rant on ,please label your post as "Having a Cow" so I can find it easily!!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nicofrog:

.....Why here? the HUMONGOUS quantities of wasted food in the dumpers here is staggering,thrift stores throw away hundreds of pounds of perfectly good items daily

our PROGRAMS (Food Bank,Redwood Gospel etc ) are good ,the weather is beautiful a lot of the time,a lot of the people are beautiful and friendly(YOU) so why NOT stay here. I know a bush the cops don't know about yet!!

So sorry no quick solutions here just yet... I am blessed I enjoy work and still can!

what if there was a homeless run Rural Waste management,recycle and compost humanure group
allow camps on unused property above water line,monitor for fire safety, clean and recycle all goods ,run simple humanure sawdust buckets (proven safe and effective if managed correctly in Sonoma county by ME.)

Small villages could have tool lockers that allowed for yard work in adjoining neighbourhoods , shopping cart trucks could deliver green waste to small local compost systems .

You might say that I'm a dreamer...

---

I'm afraid you are, but your proposal or something like it seems to me to be the only humane and realistic way to deal with people who are unable to maintain (pay for) a permanent residence. Cunning plans developed by people who may have the best of intentions don't seem to be successful. You don't mention any plan to deal with those who because of mental illness or bad attitude couldn't thrive under that plan - it would require some organization and cooperation. I have no idea whether it's many or few of the homeless. Until town governments and neighboring people have some faith that the kind of community you suggest will be maintainable, it's not likely to happen.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nicofrog:

...
homeless folks naturally just like you or me do not want to be right under everyone’s nose on the sidewalk,but every time they build a nice place to stay in the woods or bushes the cops come and route them out. I have seen the cops and dicks near the smart train tracks bring in a back hoe and destroy their tents WITH their possessions inside! the cops made them all come out,clear away from the tents ,and then destroyed them and put it all in a dumpster.

---

related -- I was just reading the comments on a WaPo article about the new proposed budget. There was an interesting exchange. The OP on it described a childhood of poverty and overworked parents, and said they wouldn't wish that on anyone. The comments after it were of the type that makes me despair for a solution the most. Several people said, "hey, that was my childhood too, we lived on rats and bird droppings, sewed till our fingers bled, but would never never take welfare. And look at me now, I'm pretty damn successful". Well, they were more modest than that, but I caught that undertone. In case you wondered, these are the Trump supporters that confuse liberals, who see them as voting against their own interests. They obviously don't see it that way. As long as that's a major component of American thinking, that hard work and good character is enough and that those who don't thrive in that environment don't deserve help, our society will continue to fail a good chunk of its citizenry.

While I understand your bitterness about these actions (direct violation of 4th Amendment "the people have a right to be secure in their homes, persons and personal property") it is not all negative. Just 4 days ago I was parked at night on a side street and heard rapping, flashlights, etc. for over 1/2 hour to which I did not respond. Finally a door opened and it was a cop and I said, "you did not identify yourself" to which he replied, ma'am I'm trying to help you, you are parked in someone's driveway, blocking it". My oops, I immediately moved and he had the tow truck right there ready for a tow. Thank you officer.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nicofrog:

i have been homeless or border line homeless for around 18 years; ...

I will offer you a different perspective, and many of you especially land owners and realtors with dislike it.

You are not having trouble managing citizens, you are having trouble managing your POLICE !
...
...

---

Great post Nico. I've been homeless myself. The main problem is if the govt authorities do not control the homeless, by tearing down illegal structures, making them move, not wanting them to sleep in Starbucks doorway, etc... if they provide great services, this will encourage more homeless to move to this area, which is not a desirable thing.

While there are many good people who are homeless, there are also many in the homeless community who are alcoholics, druggies, mentally ill, thieves, criminals, etc. This is a fact. Accommodating them is not in the best interest of society. Our culture is based on self reliance, making something of yourself, contributing to society, etc. Homeless people are, in general, are not interested in these values. Who in their right mind would want to live next to a homeless shelter?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nicofrog:

i have been homeless or border line homeless for around 18 years; ...

You are not having trouble managing citizens,you are having trouble managing your POLICE !...

---

There are also a good number of people who live in and own homes who are alcoholics, druggies, mentally ill, thieves, and criminals. Many of us live next door to them. How many of us really know our neighbors? These character flaws are usually well hidden in the sheltered, but the homeless are exposed for all to see, and judge.....and fear.

Money is the deciding factor, and long as they can afford to live here, that's really the bottom line.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

Great post Nico. I've been homeless myself. ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

Great post Nico. I've been homeless myself. ...

---

You have valid points, but I'd avoid the phrase 'government control'. And of course it's not a 'desirable thing' to encourage homeless to move to here, or for that matter to any centralized area. But I don't understand why so few follow their logic to the end. There's pretty much concensus on the problems and on the unacceptability of many solutions. All that says is that the solutions have to get more creative and maybe more disruptive. But the problem (better, the issue) won't disappear on its own. You have to accomodate them - the alternative is to 'fix' them or dispose of them. Neither seem likely or moral. That's what I liked about Nico's ideas. They lead to changing the way things work instead of pounding the round peg into the square hole or discarding the peg alltogether.

There are hard things - the hardest is dealing with mental illnesses because our society also respects individual nonconformance. That's a win over most of history, but the price is paid by those who are ill, who are not just free spirits. But there's no agreement on where that line falls.

Also as you say, there are many or most who don't want to live in an area where there are a lot of homeless (fix that first - there' shouldn't be homeless). Also many people don't want to live near frat-houses, town centers, freeways, transit hubs, roosters or barking dogs, and a bunch of other things. But some do. If there was a way to turn 'homeless encampments' into nonconformist communities, I'm sure interesting features would develop. Many of the homeless have trouble succeeding under capitalism. Many successfully people aren't all that enamored with it either, though. They might find common ground fairly easily.

Your last point, "Our culture is based on self reliance" is to me a big problem. Why is everyone supposted to value that? There's a lot of loneliness and our high rates of suicide indicate that there's a problem. And culture-wide values themselves are a problem. It's too easy to equate being moral/normal to holding those values rather than others that are really equivalent. I think of the example of those who kept all their savings in low-rate savings and were screwed by the economics of the last ten or twenty years. I've seen people interviewed who feel betrayed, because in the post-depression era people were trained that conservative investment was safe, thrift was a virtue, and 'gambling' on stocks or spending too much on housing was too risky. They seem to uniformly believe that they're the moral, good folks and the world's gone crazy or even evil. Nope, they just were out of step with the evolution of what the culture values.

Does everyone remember, not so many years ago, when people without money who had mental/emotional illnesses had homes/hospitals to live in? Like in Sonoma, with staff who did therapy and cared for them?
And because of CHANGING VALUES/POLITICAL FORCES, the BUDGET was SLASHED and the places CLOSED? Why is there no talk about this basic care for the people of THE RICHEST COUNTRY THAT HAS EVER BEEN ON EARTH? jude

You are right to mention mental health--the largest common denominator with homelessness is mental health (brain chemistry imbalance). Addressing this would also be a tremendous step toward reducing violence (domestic violence, elder abuse, road rage, racism that is not culturally based, domestic terrorism/mass shootings and police violence.).
What will it take to have a movement where we could target the largest population in our criminal non justice system, and create major changes across our world?

There are few services that address this--try to get a youth to see a counselor, therapist, psychiatrist--especially someone with few resources. Locally, West county health system is a good start, yet underfunded.

Where is the movement to make mental health the most important health issue that faces us? With the ability to focus on brain chemistry imbalance we could dramatically change so many primary concerns.

the only work/ research i am aware of that addresses brain chemistry imbalance is the effort of the Avielle foundation (https://aviellefoundation.org/), founded by the scientist parents whose daughter was murdered in the Sandy Hook shootings [as opposed to the 5 groups i can name that work on breast cancer even while we know that separating cancers (by body part) rarely gives us the most effective approach.]

Housing and food need bolstering, no question. (food banks are difficult for many to access, especially with out a car and offered unusual hours).

Would love to see brain health up there with cancer, heart disease, Alzheimers--i can't' think of any other area we could target where potentially so many dramatic changes would be possible. Can't think of any more core social prevention issue than this one.
:heart::heart::heart::waccosun::waccosun::waccosun:

RE:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

The main problem is if the govt authorities do not control the homeless, by tearing down illegal structures, making them move, not wanting them to sleep in Starbucks doorway, etc... if they provide great services, this will encourage more homeless to move to this area, which is not a desirable thing.

---

It seems to me that kind of attitude and way of thinking without different, more compassionate way of thinking it would eventually put us further down the slippery slope towards the eventual acceptance of what could become a form of economic-based banishment or even worse, genocide.

I know what I said may sound kind of harsh, but so be it.

The middle class in our society is shrinking, hence; more joblessness, (=) more homelessness... ...Has anyone noticed that he cost of living; IE: Rent, Mortgage, commutes, etc. have gone up?.. ...Or that wages in general have either gone down as compared to the cost of living?.. ...Or that for many in so-called 'middle-class' income bracket that their wages and earnings have stagnated?

Because of job outsourcing to other countries, to a smaller degree than most people think; and to a much larger extent than most people think > the lack of college education, automation, computers, and robotics, etc. there will continue to be trend towards there being fewer and fewer so-called well-paying jobs available all over the US and locally, yet there will become a higher ratio of people to existing, good paying, middle-class jobs.

I think we should be concerned and think about what to do about the next wave of who will become homeless next!

The existing homeless people who are in need of assistance are not anywhere close to having their needs met as it is.

There are many possible and humane solutions, but violating the civil rights and stomping on the dignity of homeless people, which seems to occur almost on a daily basis in our state which, in part, seems like under certain circumstances some people are willing to say that is okay because of reasons like Nobody ("who...)... ..."in their right mind"would want to live next to a homeless shelter", or, _____Fill in the blank.

There are NIMBYs who vote for and elect politicians that purposely make it virtually impossible for an adequate sanitary place for the homeless, or even persons who are just traveling through the area for that matter, to put their human waste in (I'm talking about urine and excrement specifically)... ... No 'open' bathrooms or outhouses; or the existing ones are woefully inadequate at best,... ...Also, no safe place to take a shower (particularly for women) etc....
... Unless, of course, you have enough money for a motel room just to get some minimal sleep, take a crap, or shower or bathe; in which case you're probably not homeless.
More and more motels these days only accept credit cards or special preapproved vouchers; no cash.
Homeless people more often than not, do not have a credit card.

Obviously, there has been an exodus of homeless people from places like Santa Rosa and of course other areas too that essentially criminalize homelessness and being very poor.

It is inevitable that homeless people will end up relocating to other places that have not yet made such draconian inhuman laws from the places where law enforcement is used to give them the boot.

It is inevitable that places such as West Sonoma County, for example, will end up getting more than their fair share of homeless because of the draconian laws that were made and enforced in other areas.

Of course there are going to be a certain percentage of those homeless people that relocate who are, for lack of better words, going to be 'troublemakers'.

Justifying and excuse making for inhumane treatment and constitutional violations done to homeless people, if not hints at, actually glares of prejudice and creates a space for more injustice to emerge; IMHO... ... Specifically, NIMBY/ism is one of the most hypocritical things that I notice in a so-called progressive' neighborhood. That kind of NIMBY-ism makes it far easier than it should be for gross injustice both here and elsewhere to be an acceptable norm.

Of course, I have a different reason for believing that there should be no homeless shelters (and therefore nobody would have to 'live next to' one)... ...I don't think anybody should be 'Aced-Out' of access to minimal resources and be forced into 'homeless' in the 1st place.

Our nation needs to have a very important conversation that does not leave anybody out, which also does not unfairly allow moneyed-interests to be over-represented > (as is almost always the case).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Icssoma:

...--the largest common denominator with homelessness is mental health (brain chemistry imbalance).

---

Could you please link to any source/s with data that support that statement?

Thanks.:waccosun:

Could all you folks who feel the situation could be improved, please do something about it?

I could be wrong, so please correct me, but it seems the county has tied it's hands but refusing to create the necessary structure to start correcting the problem

If you contact the board, and it's a homeless problem, you get referred to the CDC, the community development commission, These are the folks that handle HUD, federal housing assistance money. The Feds do not do shelter, they do permanent housing. This is outrageously expensive, serves few and leaves no money leftover for shelter( soon to be discontinued, new goals for federal housing assistance ). Temporary shelter is not their concern, they do not have the funding.

This leaves the homeless,homeless. Services may be available, but is access?

A temporary, transitional camp would provide a step up from the sidewalk. A sanctioned campsite would, in theory, allow "campers" to keep there stuff-safe, and allow some protection from tweakers and gangsters.

This is currently not being done and there is no framework to allow it's creation. The only agency that would get
the job to do this does not see this as part of it's job description.

Lynda Hopkins is on-board w/ camping as a temporary solution but the rest of the board? The folks living on the sidewalks ,are still there, they got chased away for the big SR plaza ground - breaking, but now they're back.
Who gave that order? Did you see anything in the PD about that sweep?

Call the press democrat. Tell them you want to see coverage in the paper,daily about how this problem is getting fixed.Letters are helpful.

Call the board, call your friends who don't live in this district and tell them to call their supe and ask what did the board do at their last meeting to address this problem,did they create any new beds, how many folks got taken off the street, how many more folks are no longer housed and in need of shelter?

All the other attending problems that come w/ being homeless start to improve w/ shelter.

Do not buy "we are doing the best we can". They are not, anything that maintains the status quo keeps these people on the street.

The only alternative to a mental health problem is jail. Where are the services to provide assistance to the mentally ill homeless? Do these folks know about what services are available? Why not? These services don't exist? Can the county do a better job than the current set-up? Do you really think this is the best they can do?
What will it take to do better? Do they know? Do they need help finding out what else can be done? Does the board think if they sit on their hands long. enough, the problem will fix itself? Does it really matter where the homeless person is from if there are no services to provide assistance?

Do you folks do Facebook? Can you start an on-line site that could get the idea for a sanctioned campground
started?

Do you know homeless students? Ask them what the jc is doing to create housing/shelter? Are they provided with the resources to become sheltered?

If you make your presence known in an unavoidable way, like those sidewalkers, a new path could be created.

And do it now, what needs to happen to get these people off the street by the time it turns cold?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by patnicholson:

...I could be wrong, so please correct me, but it seems the county has tied it's hands but refusing to create the necessary structure to start correcting the problem

If you contact the board, and it's a homeless problem, you get referred to the CDC, the community development commission, These are the folks that handle HUD, federal housing assistance money. The Feds do not do shelter, they do permanent housing. This is outrageously expensive, serves few and leaves no money leftover for shelter( soon to be discontinued, new goals for federal housing assistance ). Temporary shelter is not their concern, they do not have the funding.

---

Commonly referred to as "getting the runaround".

Quote:

---

This leaves the homeless,homeless. Services may be available, but is access?

---

Some services are probably available, sometimes, to some people. Same goes for access, sometimes for some people.

Quote:

---

A temporary, transitional camp would provide a step up from the sidewalk. A sanctioned campsite would, in theory, allow "campers" to keep there stuff-safe, and allow some protection from tweakers and gangsters.

This is currently not being done and there is no framework to allow it's creation. The only agency that would get
the job to do this does not see this as part of it's job description.

---

= deaf ears, = denial of service = vicious cycle. It's been happening like that for decades.

Quote:

---

Call the press democrat. Tell them you want to see coverage in the paper,daily about how this problem is getting fixed.Letters are helpful.

---

2 or 3 times a year is closer to what will really happen on that.

RE:

Quote:

---

Call the board, call your friends who don't live in this district and tell them to call their supe and ask what did the board do at their last meeting to address this problem,did they create any new beds, how many folks got taken off the street, how many more folks are no longer housed and in need of shelter?...

---

Lots of suggestions there.
It's not like all of what you have suggested has not been previously been done in Sonoma County before...
...Been there, done that.

Does anybody know of or remember about a group of people who referred to themselves as S.C.R.A.P.?... ...(it's been so long I forget exactly what that acronym stands for but I seem to remember, it probably stood for Sonoma County Rural Action Project). It was a small association of people that one of was Mary Moore.

I was a member of that group for a while many years ago when I lived in Monte Rio.
S.C.R.A.P. routinely did exactly what you mentioned, and even more. (a voice with at least some organization that did speak for the poor and disenfranchised to County officials, etc.) and also did more things such as Bohemian Grove awareness and such.

All I can say about those kinds of suggestions is that if literally hundreds of people honestly and respectfully, in person, by letter, petition, or email, etc. try to convince your supervisors to come up with the money and make things happen for the homeless before it gets cold next winter as has been suggested, it might make a small ding in the armor of socioeconomic based 'denial of service'; but little more than that at best is remotely likely.

I can tell you from some first-hand experience in the past and by observation in the current times that not much, if anything will actually get done in a significant enough way that would actually mitigate homelessness in Sonoma County or most of anywhere else in the country for that matter.

When very rich and powerful monied interests are involved, (In Sonoma County, monied interests are embedded and deeply involved to the core).
I suggest: don't make your voice hoarse from screaming into deaf ears.

The point I've been trying to make all along here is that it is a big national issue and cannot be solved by one County alone.

California, if it were a country, would be within the 10 wealthiest in the whole world; yet, California by itself may not have the means to deal with the homeless issue without every other state also being on board with it, and coming up with real, substantial doable schemes to solve the core problems causing homelessness in the 1st place.

Homelessness is a symptom of the actual problem.
The actual problem is so huge nobody really wants to deal with that, particularly, those who are doing anywhere between okay and fairly well-to-do within the existing economic structure.
The vast majority of people that are in those categories don't want to rock the boat for fear they will be next to go overboard and end up homeless!

the major shutdowns occurred with Regan as governor, they were never reversed. there are virtually no places/options for people.
this is one piece of the problem.
we need research to look at medical options. many people i know will not take medication because they feel slow, zombie like, not like themselves. perhaps it is a coincidence, but many of these people self medicate with marijuana. many people are successful with managing their lives this way.
many are not.
i know two people who wouldn't take medication for the above reasons, and a significant additional factor was the medications they tried (which is a huge process unto itself), took away their sex drive. both were functional when i met them, both deteriorated, and killed themselves.
as a community and society we are desperate for medical support, services, options, and research. opportunities for food and housing play an enormous role in addressing mental health (brain chemistry) problems.
i am frightened by seeing us ramp up a war economy, and a war on drugs, while simultaneously taking away the very few things that help people survive (food stamps, medicare cuts, childcare options, everything that makes life a little easier.).
huge topic. to address homelessness effectively we have to have programs and services that assit people with the health of their brain (awkward, we will get used to it).
we may need to start with bandaids, advocacy, and including people on the fringe in our lives.
(small ways and large ways to help people stay above water).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Jude Iam:

Does everyone remember, not so many years ago, when people without money who had mental/emotional illnesses had homes/hospitals to live in? Like in Sonoma, with staff who did therapy and cared for them?
And because of CHANGING VALUES/POLITICAL FORCES, the BUDGET was SLASHED and the places CLOSED? Why is there no talk about this basic care for the people of THE RICHEST COUNTRY THAT HAS EVER BEEN ON EARTH? jude

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Hotspring 44:

...
I can tell you from some first-hand experience in the past and by observation in the current times that not much, if anything will actually get done in a significant enough way that would actually mitigate homelessness in Sonoma County or most of anywhere else in the country for that matter.
....
The point I've been trying to make all along here is that it is a big national issue and cannot be solved by one County alone.

California, if it were a country, would be within the 10 wealthiest in the whole world; yet, California by itself may not have the means to deal with the homeless issue without every other state also being on board with it, and coming up with real, substantial doable schemes to solve the core problems causing homelessness in the 1st place.

Homelessness is a symptom of the actual problem.
The actual problem is so huge nobody really wants to deal with that, particularly, those who are doing anywhere between okay and fairly well-to-do within the existing economic structure.
The vast majority of people that are in those categories don't want to rock the boat for fear they will be next to go overboard and end up homeless!

---

I disagree -- it's a big INTERnational issue. Countries all over the world have the challenge of providing for their population as a whole. As a country, we've been lucky to avoid the situation of Brazil or India because of the size and wealth of the country relative to our population. As to another post's invocation of Reagan as a cause, that's like blaming immigrants for loss of jobs (without the racism). The real problem is that a random individual's economic contribution isn't very high these days, and is rapidly going down. The people in Rio don't need much from those in the favelas, so they keep them away. That's going to be replicated everywhere, and in fact is being replicated everywhere. The homelessness issue is systemic, and a systemic solution, quite different from western capitalism, will need to be developed if we're to avoid just handling poverty in the traditional ugly way it's been done in the past.

The idea that it's too expensive, that California doesn't have the means, only is valid if you let the system we have now persist. Ever since the first cave-man communities, wealth depended on the contributions of its members. That's finally changing, and there's really no hint of how we'll adapt. In that sense, the homelessness crisis is valuable in that as it gets worse, we'll have to confront it rather than paper it over with small charitable efforts.

I get your point; RE:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

I disagree -- it's a big INTERnational issue.

---

In the sense of longer-term (in comparison to the local homeless shelter that we are talking about and the local homelessness and more localized issues pertaining to that), I think you're absolutely correct.
A good example is what is going on in Europe and the Middle East regarding the multiple refugee crisis which will definitely just expand and continue to grow and end up being more of a worldwide 'challenge' as time goes on.

I think it is extremely unlikely that a few local people from Sonoma County and surrounding counties, on our own, without a national movement of some kind backing it would have the ability to convince government bodies per se to deal with whats going on here in the US regarding homelessness, never mind the rest of the world.

It seems to me it's a moot point at this point in time to expect the world to come together to deal with things in such a way, (that), whereas American homelessness, internationally speaking would be of enough importance to spend any time on as far as the international scene is concerned.

Quote:

---

Countries all over the world have the challenge of providing for their population as a whole.

---

So many countries are not up to that challenge.
I'm not so sure that we here in the US are up to that 'challenge'... ...Yet.

Anyway, until we have had our own discussion regarding homelessness here in US nationally, and have had some kind of success coping with and 'solving' our own homelessness issue/s, the world (INTERnational") homelessness issues for the most part will be swept under the rug or sidelined at best, completely ignored, or worse, used for party-affiliated political gain here in US is more likely... ... The United Nations?... ...HA! I will not go too deep into my sarcasm about the 'INTERnational' system's UN to do anything more than a horse-and-pony show at this point... ...No 'power' members in the U.N. refuse to agree on much of anything...

...:argument: ...Ever!...:pullshair:... ...Politics!:banghead:

Quote:

---

The idea that it's too expensive, that California doesn't have the means, only is valid if you let the system we have now persist.

---

Yes... ...And??...

...BTW, I hope you mean we and not me when you said "you" because me by my tiny, itsy-bitsy little o'l self is next to nothing in the big picture... ...Insignificant... ...IOW, 1x1x1x1x1... still =1. But, 1+1+1... = we.:waccosun:

even without the specific numbers here, let's get clear - the US is not Somalia... the friggin budget trump just submitted is trillions$$$$$$$$$$$$ to the extremely rich, including war machinery/arms manufacturers.

with that budget changed, ALL this could be easily solved. How to effect that budget change is the question, not IF homelessness/hunger/education for all/ etc. could be solved. the money is there, it's just spent on death, destruction and making more money for the wealthiest. wtf.
jude

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Jude Iam:

even without the specific numbers here, let's get clear - the US is not Somalia... the friggin budget trump just submitted is trillions$$$$$$$$$$$$ to the extremely rich, including war machinery/arms manufacturers. ...

---

ns. I'm really curious to see the reaction to this budget and other outrages. Will more people realize they're going to be casualties of the system, rather than beneficiaries? and will a movement (with compelling leaders) grow out of it to make some real changes? I don't care where the smart money goes, I'm hopeful anyway.

Here is something:
The pizza shop feeding the homeless one slice at a time

several people have expressed interest in helping people individually.
we help out 3 homeless people on a regular basis. one is currently staying on our property. he needs a working bicycle if anyone has one. should be decent, as he would be riding on bodega hwy, and the hill to our property is steep. he also needs rides in to santa rosa. he is a good person, honest, but has a difficult time "keeping it together". actually working w. these men is a great window into homelessness, and to understand many of the issues and complexities involved.
all of them need storage, a safe place to keep their things. so if someone knows of an inexpensive storage place would be great as well.
good to know what you can do, are willing to do, and set clear limits.
most of these men need a "village" for safety, assistance & support.
if people are interested i can post specific needs of individuals here periodically.
:heart::Yinyangv::heart::Yinyangv:

Thank you for sharing about your compassionate contribution to these people. I'm not in a position at this time to help much, but would like to know what the individual needs might be. I'm very resourceful in connecting people with people, products and services.

The more specific the needs are, the easier it is for people to help. For example, when does this person need rides to Santa Rosa. I've seen bicyles on Freecycle, and it might be good to post this need there, and on your neighborhood Nextdoor. I've been amazed at the help neighbors have provided. One man had all of his power tools stolen last week from his truck, in the 3 minutes he was in a convenience store. Neighbors have come to his rescue with offers of free tools.

Thank you again for your compassion.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Icssoma:

several people have expressed interest in helping people individually.
we help out 3 homeless people on a regular basis. ...

---

thanks for the suggestions, someone also emailed me privately.
posted this because someone on wacco, (several people?), had said they wanted to help homeless people individually. think that is a great idea. when you begin to help people directly, you begin to see things that need to be done as a community, and individually to address the complexities of negotiating life when you don't have a home...a car, a bike, and more.
T., the man who needs the help now, also needs a good pair of shoes and socks. (i loaned him $ yesterday to get some shoes. he acknowledges he "went cheap", so the shoes aren't great. he didn't have enough money to get good shoes. he went to the sketchers outlet the shoes were $40 and up, outside his budget.)
if someone wants to help this man, you can contact me, & i will be a liazon, or i can give you his phone number & someone could text him & offer to take him shoe shopping (his phone is hit & miss, but he does get messages, & sometimes it works--which is better than other things.
one starts to see how things get entangled, and which people can are easier to bring back to "functioning".
i run a horse rescue as a volunteer. people and horses need help here.
there are people i give several hours of work to, so they can "keep it going", afford something they need.
this will be my last email about specific things people can do to help one individual. it takes helping with several things over several weeks/a couple months, to get this man "on his feet" again. (i focus on people that are close to functioning.). support is needed over the long haul.
come on board only if you are willing to take on a task, from start to finish.
if you want to help me do this great. if these are not things people want to take on, i fully understand.
when T. is in better shape (shoes that work, and a little less pain--i'm going to take him to a chiropractor next week and cover the costs, he can do some work and "get by". he will always need friends, support, but he will be fairly functional.
he is in a lot of pain. looking for somewhere to sleep is very hard on the body, so is spending the night in kohl's parking lot, finding bushes in a quasi safe location, walking for miles in lousy shoes, all takes its toll). ultimately he needs help getting through the medical system & needs something done to reduce the pain in his knee. not sure of the complexities. he can't take traditional pain killers, 420 products help, through one of the good local distributors, he has indirect access to them. would be helpful to have a license. a luxury). likely some other alternative therapies would be helpful as well. he does have food stamps. he can do his laundry and take showers while staying with me.) there is so much more. if participating in these planned acts of kindness appeals to you, wonderful.
i want to make this opportunity available.
i posted this because i remember someone (some people?) said they would like to help an individual.
so thought this posting made sense.
think it is a great way to have an idea of the barriers, while giving people an opportunity to do a specific act that will make a difference in helping someone "stay off the streets".
this will be my last post on ways to help this individual.
would be great to have other members join the village, as i am doing as much as i can at this point.
this is a good time in this person's life to make a difference.
the path to ending homelessness, temporarily or permanently takes tenacity, on the individuals part, and on the helpers part.
this is why i am suggesting an approach of several acts, that would make a difference, but would not require permanent involvement. someone could move this person forward by doing one simple, affordable act.
thanks for reading. my best.
:Yinyangv::heart::Yinyangv::heart:

thanks Shandi. appreciate the ideas.
i am doing all i can. if someone wants to find the resource that is great. beyond dropping my friend off when i go out, & picking him up, and things that come up, i am doing all i can.
was hoping that someone had the time wants to focus on these things (shoes or a bike), or has the resources, wonderful.
if someone had the ability to offer rides, great.
it takes time, or money.
was hoping someone wanted to do one thing that was finite and would make a difference. of course adding someone to the mix is a good thing, as well.
getting involved really helps one's understanding of the problem.
working to change the criminal justice system and create resources for brain health are the two biggest issues i see.
i try to spend my time w. people on the upside. it doesn't always work that way.
thanks for your kind words.
my best.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Thank you for sharing about your compassionate contribution to these people. I'm not in a position at this time to help much, but would like to know what the individual needs might be. ...

---

Shame on you, Tommy, for putting everyone who ever lost their homes in the same category as thieves and criminals. Shame on you for your heartless response. Addicts need help. Homeless folks need help. They are not always one in the same. It is our responsibility to watch out for our fellow citizens, Americans and all humans. That is my opinion, but also the opinion of people in the most civilized places on earth. Blessings for a better 2018 and a good life. CatSwan

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

Great post Nico. I've been homeless myself. The main problem is if the govt authorities do not control the homeless, by tearing down illegal structures, making them move, not wanting them to sleep in Starbucks doorway, etc... if they provide great services, this will encourage more homeless to move to this area, which is not a desirable thing.

While there are many good people who are homeless, there are also many in the homeless community who are alcoholics, druggies, mentally ill, thieves, criminals, etc. This is a fact. Accommodating them is not in the best interest of society. Our culture is based on self reliance, making something of yourself, contributing to society, etc. Homeless people are, in general, are not interested in these values. Who in their right mind would want to live next to a homeless shelter?

---

:idea:My memory kicked-in today; the acronym "SCRAP" stood for: Sonoma Civil Rights Action Project.:waccosun:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Hotspring 44:

Does anybody know of or remember about a group of people who referred to themselves as S.C.R.A.P.?... ...(it's been so long I forget exactly what that acronym stands for but I seem to remember, it probably stood for Sonoma County Rural Action Project). It was a small association of people that one of was Mary Moore.

---

Here is an example of what goes on for consideration. I spoke directly to the County Supervisors; relating this information.

I know a man who lives in a minivan. In fact I helped him find the one he currently is in for $1800. He eats at the mission and gets SSI of about $950.

He had been on the CDC waiting list for a Section 8 housing voucher for quite a while. He had dropped out of good employment to be on the streets using Meth and alcohol but goes to AA and is several years clean now.

Well he got awarded a voucher finally, which is what happens if you sit on the waiting list long enough. He is 60 years old now I think. He showed me the voucher information. It said he could have a studio apartment for up to $1080 rent or a one bedroom for up to something like$1150. If he got a 2 bedroom he would have to find someone to share with and the voucher could be put toward his share.

So the way it would work would be if he found a studio for $1080 he would have to pay $300 and the voucher would pick up the rest. I think the $300 may have come from figuring about 1/3 of his SSI income.

So naturally he could not find anything and the voucher was forfeited and will go to someone else futher down the waiting list.

So what does this indicate? To me at least a couple things. First of all it should be possible to construct and rent out profitably small studios of about 450 square feet at a rate of $1080 per month. They are less than half the size of your typical 2br/2ba but could bring in more rent on a per square footage basis. Secondly, the idea of handing out vouchers when there is no chance of them getting used is senseless.

County Supervisors see no problem with this situation. They proclaim the $300K in government subsidy per "affordable unit" is required and are focused on ways of raising money to pay these subsidies out. And for the most part it is taken for granted that these subsidized "affordables," if they ever get built, will generally all be 2 bedroom units.

Yes Tommy-easy to vote for something you do not live near and are paid to work/vote for.

Not criticizing just an FWIW, as an FYI.
Some of that SSI money, about $300 above the actual maximum SSI payment the US (federal) government pays (in California) is paid from the California government because of the 'high cost of living' here in CA.... ...

Anyway...
It goes like this: unless there is other income SSA Disability (differs from SSI) {in part}, Veterans benefits, or other income, Social Security Administration considers that; if/when you are receiving SSI as your only income, by not paying rent and actually 'living' where you are reporting you are paying rent, (that) the cost of living for SSI recipient is less and SSI does reduce SSI payments by about $300 per month.

So, the man you helped, if he is on just SSI is most likely actually getting around $600 per month.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

I know a man who lives in a minivan. In fact I helped him find the one he currently is in for $1800. He eats at the mission and gets SSI of about $950.

---

For some of us here, or at least myself anyway, I ask you; where/what is the Quote from the post that Tommy made that you are replying to?:hmmm:
Just asking because otherwise that statement has little to none context in this thread; IMHO.:2cents:.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Codyboy1:

Yes Tommy-easy to vote for something you do not live near and are paid to work/vote for.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

Here is an example of what goes on for consideration. I spoke directly to the County Supervisors; relating this information.

County Supervisors see no problem with this situation. They proclaim the $300K in government subsidy per "affordable unit" is required and are focused on ways of raising money to pay these subsidies out. And for the most part it is taken for granted that these subsidized "affordables," if they ever get built, will generally all be 2 bedroom units.

---

Once I was looking for a place in SF and spent about 5 weeks living in my truck while I looked for an apartment.

I found that within very specific parameters, it was like a vacation/ camping trip.

The parameters were -
* comfortable bed, and knowing the area well enough to know where to park, in San Francisco.
* a supply of favorite vacation reading type books. I like Michael Connelly, the crime whodunit type books about life in Los Angeles. Michael C. writes about LA in a way that makes it seem nice and familiar - which seems like quite an achievement writing wise.
* a rock solid schedule that includes early morning coffee, nutrition, and a gym to work out at.
* Internet access, e.g. the Fedex/Kinko's on Stanyan in San Francisco.
* knowing the restaurants. there's nothing like eating at the Chinese places on Clement after swimming a mile or 2. Of course you have to watch out for debris in the rice, I cracked a crown once from a piece of rock in the rice at the Chinese barbecue place.
* knowing the laundromats, the coffee shops, the tea houses, the bookstores, etc.
If you don't have to spend money on rent or health care, it's fun eating out and spending an hour or 2 at the Green Apple bookstore on Clement.

I am vision impaired, by way of a bad outcome from LASIK eye surgery. So I listen to a lot of Books on Tape. That means you need a way in your mobile truck home to get electricity. That can be as simple as charging up a battery when you're at the gym. Or at least buying batteries in bulk for your audio player.

I lived in Santa Rosa for 6 years, and then found a 15 acre hillside property in Southwest Oregon for a rather amazing price (a divorce sale).

When I first moved here I went to the local coffee shop almost every morning and met one of the local homeless people, named John L. It turned out, he was living in his truck. Under those circumstances, I found him to be WAY more stable than some of the local authority figures.

When I was growing up, part of the education was about the "collapse of the Soviet Union". One of the examples of social disintegration cited was, a streetlight is killing people because it's not set up right - and nobody can figure out how to get it fixed.

As it turns out, we have just such a stoplight where I live. My attempts to get it fixed, by emailing the local radio station owner & state rep, and also the city manager, were like running into brick walls. My talks with the employees at the 2 hardware stores that overlook the dangerous intersection confirmed my initial observation - they use the intersection every day, they said, and it makes them nervous. The problem with the intersection is that it gives drivers going in opposite directions the impression that they each have the right of way, for about 15 seconds out of each 4 minute traffic cycle.

After finding the local authority figures so wonting (wanting ?) in their approach to their supposed jobs, I couldn't help but find John L. be a refreshingly stable person. Most people in his situation would have cracked or broken in some way.

I found the process of establishing trust with a non-Yuppie (if you're from California and used to dealing with Silicon Valley type professionals) to be sort of 2 steps forward, 1 step backward, but very worth the process. John L eventually found an apartment with some kind of subsidy downtown near his usual haunts.


The supply of housing in the US is artificially constrained, with price supports. That is related to the real estate bubble that popped in 2007/8/9, and then re-inflated.

Part of that process was the purchase of $Trillions in problem mortgages by the US gov., to prop up their value. If those mortgages hadn't been purchased, the bubble would have deflated more, and there would be a lot more housing on the market "for cheap".

That unique American "rescue the bankers but not the homeless people" subsidy definitely has ripple effects that affect every renter (and real estate shopper) in the US. In other words, almost everybody.

He is on Social Security disability because he sprained his back, so badly that it will not heal properly and there is a pinched nerve(s) and he cannot lift any weight of significance. So maybe it is not SSI but something else. Maybe SSDI? He had been previously recommended to apply for disability long before the back injury due to drug/mental issues. He refused to even pursue that, maybe out of self respect. Nothing wrong with him in that regard. Quitting a job to take up drug use and alcohol was just a choice and he did not want to be labeled disabled because of that. The $950 figure is a number I recall getting from him. Maybe I will confirm it next time I see him.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Hotspring 44:

For some of us here, or at least myself anyway, I ask you; where/what is the Quote from the post that Tommy made that you are replying to?:hmmm:
Just asking because otherwise that statement has little to none context in this thread; IMHO.:2cents:.

---

That is in reference to west county services wanting to vote to buy the horse barn for a homeless services center. I believe residents felt the only ones that should have voting rights were those living in the area, not those who'd get paid to operate it.

Thanks MikeH.
I did a word search of Tommy's postings on this thread and found what you are referring to #1:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

That is in reference to west county services wanting to vote to buy the horse barn for a homeless services center. I believe residents felt the only ones that should have voting rights were those living in the area, not those who'd get paid to operate it.

---

Exactly-we live here full time & pay taxes-why would we want to be the only place in the United States that has Homeless services with a population of 3-5k?? A demographic we do not want!

Cody boy, is your response sincere, or sarcastic?
hoping it is that latter.
(in case the former sf has good services. other places do as well. it is called humanity. doing the right thing. by the grace of god...)
i believe the common denominator is brain chemistry imbalance (of course capitalism w. insufficient checks).
if one is born with conditions, severe brain chemistry imbalances, & we don't treat it, acknowledge it, or work to help/support/treat/offer safety nets, what does it say about us?
(brain chemistry imbalance often called "mental illness". misnomer. a brain that isn't healthy. probably the most critical organ that needs to be healthy. (you might make a case for the heart. yet we put $$$$$$$ into heart disease, cancer, war, fighting for oil, fighting for corporations to keep their wealth.) at best our priorities are majorly screwed.
the good thing about heart disease or cancer, you usually get sympathy, support (ceres project), a little extra care/love.
when you have severe brain chemistry imbalance you get trashed, discarded, a town w. out a psychiatrist at it's health center. (she was good & recently left, their is one available by skype! i would make the case for 3.:heart::heart::heart:)

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Codyboy1:

Exactly-we live here full time & pay taxes-why would we want to be the only place in the United States that has Homeless services with a population of 3-5k?? A demographic we do not want!

---

man, people get excited about what they think they bought with the taxes they pay. Taxes are supposed to pay for civilization (so saith the Supreme Court). Saving money at the price of endangering our civilization is a poor tradeoff.
I also don't understand the reverence some people have for how deserving the rich are of their 'earnings', but that's a different (though related) subject.

Really-Guerneville brings in most of the TOT taxes in our county. Also-rich? My home is in foreclosure!! Please don’t assume what you do not know.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

man, people get excited about what they think they bought with the taxes they pay. Taxes are supposed to pay for civilization (so saith the Supreme Court). Saving money at the price of endangering our civilization is a poor tradeoff.
I also don't understand the reverence some people have for how deserving the rich are of their 'earnings', but that's a different (though related) subject.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Codyboy1:

Really-Guerneville brings in most of the TOT taxes in our county. Also-rich? My home is in foreclosure!! Please don’t assume what you do not know.

---

sorry - wasn't meaning to conflate the two things, especially with you as the target. The two ideas are related only in that they both involve the ownership of money that passed through a person's hands. No, the fact that taxes derive from a person's assets doesn't give that person right to dictate the way it's spent. Also, people's wealth is rarely as 'earned' as most people seem to feel, so returning some of that to society via taxation is in no way inherently unfair. So, back from another OT excursion:

Quote:

---

we live here full time & pay taxes-why would we want to be the only place in the United States that has Homeless services with a population of 3-5k?? A demographic we do not want!

---

my claim is that your full-time residence seems to give you the same rights as the full-time residence of someone in a tent by the river. So why that? and why should the paying-taxes part mean you get to decide what demographics are permitted?

Maybe I have missed something but I don't think so.
I have read through this thread, a few postings more than once.
I have not noticed anybody here suggesting that the Russian River area, Sonoma County, or, even the state of California for that matter, should be the 'only' place in the United States that has 'Homeless services'.

In fact, I think that it is arguable to say that there exists a particular "demographics", (so to speak); (hint: VERY wealthy), {certain monied interests} seem to take for granted or expect greater 'ownership' (theirs) of everything simply because they pay more taxes (or sometimes not even; Some {many?} of whom were/are either borne into or inherited extreme wealth, etc.)... ...whereas the 'belief' is that they have more rights than others who don't, can't haven't, etc. paid as much taxes.
Anyway, I don't want to get into a rant about that it would be too far off of subject than I already have.

Although I will mention that I think that people who have ended up homeless, some of whom is not because of drug addicted, alcohol screw ups etc.. while there are plenty such around, there are also homeless who do not fall into the category within that definition.
Even when someone does fit into that or similar definition 'category' there do in various ways pay very high taxes in the form of things not being available to them such as reasonably decent medical care (which exists is in just about all other Western developed nations), reasonably decent shelter, a safe place to be without being criminalized, etc.

:2cents: I think that many people who are either homeless or almost homeless and those who have been homeless who are not homeless at the moment, etc., have with their own humanity paid and are paying in most cases, extremely high exorbitant taxes by way of the way they have been and are treated, mistreated, abused, neglected, ostracized, outcast, discriminated against, criminalized, bad-mouthed, scapegoated, and so on.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Codyboy1:

Exactly-we live here full time & pay taxes-why would we want to be the only place in the United States that has Homeless services with a population of 3-5k?? A demographic we do not want!

---

Oh BTW, FWIW, there are homeless people who also 'live here full time & pay taxes'... ...probably not directly paying to the county for property owners real estate taxes... But... Most certainly are Indirectly paying county property owners real estate taxes with what little they do have to spend locally. Some percentage of what they spend for survival is by way of 'design' going into property tax through the 'system', no doubt.:yinyang:

yep- what an Ef'n set-up all this sounds like. that's the game though and the BOS, none of our elected officials will ever admit it.
how many folks i have to wonder, got Section 8 housing, only to never make use of it because this damn County just can't seem to create affordable housing.
and Now, with the Mr. Carson in charge of HUD, that will probably (really) be a thing of the past.
such a pity we care so little. but hey, drink up- the wine is still flowing!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

Here is an example of what goes on for consideration. I spoke directly to the County Supervisors; relating this information.

I know a man who lives in a minivan. ...

---

Santa Rosa has a resource that most towns do not have - one of the best affordable university-quality schools in the nation. I know called a Junior College, but I have found them to have classes as good as the most highly esteemed universities, which professors to match.

However, people who are worried about their survival - Sonoma Homeless folks for example - do not write sonnets, or compose music, or write almost next best American novels, or learn HTML5.

They are in a state of continually being overwhelmed by the anxiety of their homelessness, and the illegality of many parts of the homeless lifestyle.

Both the singer Jewel and the author JK Rowling were homeless or very close to homeless when they created the first creations that brought them the money to not be homeless. But they weren't having to deal with the possible malice of the local 'powers that be' working through the police and the city/county administration.

It is a shame to see Sonoma County/ Santa Rosa treating people who are in a difficult situation cruelly, and making it impossible for them to find a "Drishti" (something positive to focus on) to help them to a better living situation.

Where I live that would be impossible, because the junior college charges $500 per class and $200 per textbook (that is available online for $100), and it's like college as run by the Department of Homeland Security. But SRJC charges about $150 per class and the bookstore is not used as a profit center. $120 the last time I took a significant class there.

It really is feasible for homeless people in Sonoma to use SRJC as a launching pad to the next part of their lives. If they're allowed to take a gym class, use the Internet at the library, and one other class, it becomes quite compatible with medium term camping for a lifestyle.

Being a home-owner, I understand the City/County councils' orientation towards appeasing the wishes of the property owning classes. The homeless people are treated like slaves, no rights whatsoever.

Like I said in another post, I would freak about homeless people living on BLM land next to my backyard - because it's an extremely flammable landscape, next to a much larger flammable landscape. So I would say those kinds of concerns are legitimate priority concerns. Homeless people using the hill above my home as a latrine is a much, much smaller problem. If it was occurring, it would be very far down the list of priorities (the latrine part.).

I would say the caste system that is inherent in our respective city & county councils is 100%+ dysfunctional. I think maybe some of the council-members are well-meaning, in Sonoma/Santa Rosa. Not sure about where I live.

In 2014 or 2015, we had about a dozen arson fires reported in Southwest Oregon. Most of them separate incidents in separate locations, indicating different people starting the fires. Then they stopped reporting that statistic.

Any social system that creates groups of people that have resentments - and lighters - is so boneheaded in light of the 2017 fires that I would expect the councils to eventually "get it" - they can't ignore the homeless people, and they can't sweep them under the rug. That means tent camps and designated parking areas for semi-homeless people living in their vehicles.

well tommy, i'm in MY right mind, and i would live next door to a homeless shelter. providing services does NOT mean more people will move into your area. it might just show that there really are people who care, have compassion, and recognize that we are All One. that's not necessarily scary.
you know what, there are people, many of them, in positions of power and influence- and they are druggies, mentally ill, alcoholics. you know why you don't know them tommy?- it's because they are lucky to hide it ( at least for awhile). they are from some wealth perhaps, and they have $$$ too maybe. doesn't matter- they are the same as the rest of us- "Im-freaking-perfect"!
so, all you are saying, is that "some" homeless people are good, and some are alcoholics, mentally ill, etc.- sounds like our society as a whole, ey--those problems cross ALL economic, social, racial, lines. if you are an alcoholic or have a drug problem and/or mental issues, does that also mean you are Not a "good" person?
so, what is your point? if we can SEE these people right in front of us, and not hiding in privilege or something else, then they don't deserve Help?
i'm just trying to understand, i want this dialog because it's necessary for all of us to try and understand where all of us are coming from, our fears, our perceptions in order for us to find Solutions, right? When is it time to pull the plug on people? Who deserves help, who does not?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

Great post Nico. I've been homeless myself. The main problem is if the govt authorities do not control the homeless, by tearing down illegal structures, making them move, not wanting them to sleep in Starbucks doorway, etc... if they provide great services, this will encourage more homeless to move to this area, which is not a desirable thing.

... Who in their right mind would want to live next to a homeless shelter?

---

Note the statement in your post:

"He had dropped out of good employment to be on the streets using Meth and alcohol "

Actions have consequences. Yes, everything you say is true, but in my view, you omitted stating the consequences of his dropping out of good employment: he ended up homeless. It's a one way street as you age: opportunities shrink. Economically, there is only so much money available for social services, welfare, help for the homeless, veterans, etc. By dropping out of good employment, he put himself at the mercy of public funds. Rather than being in front of the 8 ball, he is behind it.

There are doubtless other people who, due to no fault of their own, had a health crisis, or lost a job, or had an accident, and ended up homeless, unable to maintain their lifestyle. I feel for all of them. There are degrees of casualty. It's not the Supervisors or Council people's fault. It's the way our economy is structured, the nature of late capitalism. Resources are being removed from the poor or needy people, and the rich are being enriched further. It's the way the class system of conservatism, and libertarian-ism works. I've heard that Sweden has a different system, of much greater equality, and a more robust social welfare program.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MikeH:

... He had dropped out of good employment to be on the streets using Meth and alcohol but goes to AA and is several years clean now....

---

He's enjoying himself now, he doesn't mind living thus way, showers everyday at "The Y," and said previously he had a gym membership for showering. He stayed at our main homeless shelter for a year. Likes being in a van much more. Meth use is very pervasive and very damaging. Even one of my supervisors, when I was doing surveying, said he had done some serious meth use when younger. He was not hesitant to share that, but if I were him I probably would have because you can see the long term effects of meth use and correlate them with the mannerisms. This fellow now smokes and consumes a lot of beer. It is no uncommon for guys I meet in either construction or surveying to buy a 12 pack to consume all by himself at the end of the day.

The guy who lives in the van, I have no reason to doubt anything he says, and he doesn't mind sharing. He is not really what I'd call sympathetic to his fellow homeless, and least not the ones he's socialized with. He says many been one the streets for decades and nothing will change. He says they're druggies looking for more drugs.

He worked for the city of San Diego public works, streets, sewers. Married, had a house and a kid. Said his wife was a drug user and he started or something, not specifically saying she got him started, but I guess they both at least dabbled in drugs, divorced, lost the house, he had to pay child support. He moved up here and went to work for the County, public works, county bridge maintenance he said. His experience in San Diego made it possible to get this job. Did it for a few years, quit to do heavy meth use and vodka. I believe I clearly see the effects of long term meth use in his mannerisms and speech. I said you must have built up some county pension? He said yeah, cashed that out a long time ago and blew it. His wife he said remarried some other drug user, but he still had child support to pay, which he didn't and they've been after him.

He has a perverse way of looking at things, like it;s a game. He likes the free "Obama phone." as he calls it. He goes for all the free meals, even though by living rent free and drug free and sober he could afford to buy some of his own food. Before he went on SSDI he worked part time in construction and had a food stamp card. He'd buy stuff we could share if I barbecued it for him. Once you get Social Security they take your food stamps away. He doesn't like that, would rather get SSDI and Food Stamps. He doesn't buy anything for barbecues anymore.

There are tons of stories like this. In fact when i made a donation to the Mission I got on their mailing list the first mailer they sent me was the story about one of their recent "rescues", a man who quit working for the city of Santa Rosa not once but twice to live on the Santa Rosa creek bank drinking till he passed out every day. It said bringing the Gospel to him helped him break from his depression and need for alcohol.

That does engender much sympathy when someone quits a better paying job than i have.

Exactly Tommy-there are consequences in real life. I am barely keeping my home, worked over 39 years housing veterans and disenfranchised folks. If you need help it is there-if you do not it is a lifestyle choice.
Sorry the Section 8 is a very long list-but being grateful would be nice. Also, many people want to live alone-me too-but I will have to adjust to keep my home-in real life you have to be flexible; maybe you have to get roommates-not the best-but better than Homeless.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

...Actions have consequences. ....

---

Yes, Thanks for mentioning those realities.
The posing question I have to all of us is; Who of the 'homeless', under what conditions, end up getting thrown under the buss because some of the 'homeless' are really screwed-up? (yes some of the most screwed-up are that way by their own conscientious, free will in choosing to do so).

Yes, also the economic system here in the USA at this present time is (still) supportive of the "Robber Baron" and social Darwinism (is systemic). It is not at all a mystery why there is such injustice spurred-on by way of economics.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by tommy:

There are doubtless other people who, due to no fault of their own, had a health crisis, or lost a job, or had an accident, and ended up homeless, unable to maintain their lifestyle...

---