from
https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/19/opinion-something-is-wrong-with-californias-homelessness-spending/

Opinion: Something is wrong with California’s homelessness spending
Continued calls for more government subsidies will waste money while
failing to alleviate the emergency

Clusters of tents belonging to homeless residents line the banks of
Coyote Creek near Tully Road on Jan. 4 in San Jose.
(Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group) Clusters of tents belonging to homeless
residents line the banks of Coyote Creek near Tully Road on Jan. 4 in
San Jose.
By KERRY JACKSON and WAYNE WINEGARDEN |
PUBLISHED: July 19, 2023 at 5:00 a.m. | UPDATED: July 19, 2023 at 5:08 a.m.

California put aside $7.2 billion to address homelessness in the 2021-22
state budget. Last year, there were an estimated 172,000 homeless
statewide, which equates to spending nearly $42,000 per homeless person.

Spending of this magnitude — which only accounts for state money — is
sufficient if it were applied effectively. The worsening crisis
indicates that something is off with how the state spends its resources.

This perspective is important in light of a comprehensive homeless
survey by UC San Francisco. Many of its findings are enlightening, but
too many of its suggestions call for more spending.

It strains credulity to believe that spending $42,000 per person is
insufficient, but if bumped up to $45,000, all will be OK. California
does not have the worst-in-the-nation homeless crisis because it spends
too little.

Continued calls for more government subsidies supporting the state’s
ineffective housing-first approach will waste money while failing to
alleviate the emergency.

The survey confirms some things we already know, such as most of the
homeless in California (78%) are unsheltered. It also provides essential
information to help sustainably address homelessness, such as the
pivotal role housing unaffordability plays in driving the problem.

Solutions require policymakers to leverage all we have learned to adopt
a more innovative structure for addressing the grim conditions.

The UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative does recommend some
innovative policies, such as establishing homeless courts as also
advocated by Gov. Gavin Newsom. While neither a perfect nor sweeping
solution, a court system ordering treatment programs for the homeless
could make a difference.

If the effort has the necessary scope and force, it can help move
homeless people suffering from mental illness and addiction into a
setting of care rather than the current invisible asylum of “the street,
the jail, and the emergency room.”

Other suggestions merely throw money at the current ineffective
government-run programs, a poor strategy bound to fail. Instead,
California should fund well-run and fully accountable private sector
groups that help homeless people gain control, address any issues and
then become self-sufficient. The “California Way” bias has blinded
lawmakers from successful initiatives in other states and tailoring them
to West Coast needs. Partnerships and nonprofits in Virginia, Tennessee
and elsewhere have shown that they can sustainably address homelessness
through novel methods, flexibility and personalization.

Another flaw is government’s focus on “controlling the cost of housing”
rather than removing disincentives driving the housing shortage. As
rising inflation reminds us, you don’t lower the cost of anything by
throwing money at people. We need to incentivize more housing supply by
lowering costs and construction time through deregulation and avoiding
harmful policies like rent control that worsen housing unaffordability.

The richest target for deregulation is also the state’s most firmly
entrenched law: the California Environmental Quality Act. While
well-intended when enacted in 1970, it has become a destructive force
derailing “the possibility of homeownership” among the “hardworking
members of Latino, Black and other minority communities,” says Jennifer
Hernandez, an environmental and land-use lawyer who has documented
CEQA’s long list of litigation abuses.

Both Newsom and before him Gov. Jerry Brown have publicly supported CEQA
reform, which is a start. A better plan would be a legislative
initiative to repeal and replace.

Concerns that dismantling CEQA would invite environmental mayhem are
overblown. Fresh legislation relying on the volumes of knowledge gained
in protecting the environment since CEQA became law, and including
provisions that would prevent it from becoming another tool for abuse
should not be beyond the abilities of lawmakers.

Spending $42,000 a year per homeless person is wheel-spinning on a grand
scale. It shows a lack of reflection and a poverty of ideas. The
progressive policy framework has made no progress on homelessness. It
shouldn’t be too much to ask lawmakers to rethink their premises.

Kerry Jackson is a fellow with the Center for California Reform at the
Pacific Research Institute. Wayne Winegarden is a senior fellow in
business and economics at the Pacific Research Institute.

RELATED ARTICLES
Opinion: Delta mega-tunnel is not the answer to state’s water challenges
Cortese: How to stop the fentanyl crisis in California schools
Opinion: California foster youth suffer as state shortchanges agencies
Glazer: My fellow California Democrats keep repeating the same mistakes
Ex-mayor makes his case: Common sense says build BART to downtown San Jose
Report an error
Policies and Standards
Contact Us
The Trust Project Logo
Tags: California LegislatureEnvironmentGavin NewsomHomelessnessJerry
BrownRent Control
Author
Kerry Jackson
Author
Wayne Winegarden