Homeless Emergency on Joe Rodota Trail

[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

[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

[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:

---

Expand

Want 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

[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/Societ...d-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

[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 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

[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 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.


Supervisors select Sonoma Valley campus to take homeless residents from Santa Rosa trail camp
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

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

Supervisors select Sonoma Valley campus to take homeless residents from Santa Rosa trail camp
TYLER SILVY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT January 14, 2020, 9:07PM

Continues here

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