Los Angeles Homeless Crisis moves to center stage

I would like to relate an experience I had in 1988 concerning homeless women and children. My wife, Debi, and I volunteered at an overnight shelter on Alameda and 4th in Los Angeles. This shelter was a converted warehouse where homeless women and children could come in at night and sleep. It was dry, safe and clean. But because the restrooms did not meet the desired standards of the City of Los Angeles, they closed the shelter down and the women and children were kicked out onto the streets. End of story on my feelings and experiences for the homeless…for now.

Since 1986 I have worked with the homeless and have many friends who have made the transition from skid row to a successful lifestyle. Lets examine the plan/program just passed by the Los Angeles County Supervisors, or rather four of the Supervisors, Mike Antonovich voted no. Thank you once again for the voice of reason Mike.

First, let us determine why this action was taken at this time. Most of us saw the video of the woman, still in a hospital gown, who was dropped off on skid row after being discharged from a hospital. I call this the “Rodney King Tape” with regard to the homeless issue. What if there had been no tape? What if she had the same experience except we were not 58 days from a county election? What if this was not a front page story in the LA Times or Daily News? What if it was not carried on television news programs? What would have happened?

I’ll tell you—NOTHING!. Incidents such as this have taken place on skid row far too frequently. So what we have with this new plan is reactionary politics--with more concern for spin, good front page headlines and the ability to present an illusion that something is being done.

The main story line has been the objection to the “Homeless Centers” which are proposed in each of the five county districts, one for each board member. Supervisor Yaroslavsky calls this a “historic investment” and decries this as an “opportunity that will not pass our way again.”

Let’s look at these historic investment centers, all five of them. Each will have 30 to 40 beds. So even if we take the high number, that’s only 200 beds for a county of ten million people covering 4,000 square miles!

The center will be fully staffed with on-site nurses, social workers, and drug treatment specialists. This will be a 30 day program. Do the math, 200 x 12 = 2,400 homeless people helped per year. Now do the rest of the math 90,000 homeless divided by 2,400 homeless helped per year. Survey says it will take 37.5 years to help the folks who are on the street today!

But you say that is only a small part of the plan. Ok, I agree. There are so many hidden costs and programs in this plan that the “Pork barrel politics” which we usually associate with Congressional bills and a “bridge to nowhere” would be jealous of the creativity involved here. Please don’t get me wrong, there are some good programs in the plan, they just have nothing to do with homeless.

Would you call someone in jail, homeless? They could be once they are releasedm but while they are in custody? I guess it depends on your definition of “is.” But for our purposes let’s look at $1.7 million for female inmates to live with their children for two days and nights to experience a “family living situation”. This will include academic classes, parenting skills and participation in job training and incentive programs. This is a great idea. It is such a great idea, that the current sheriff found funding and staff for the already existing program at a time when he let criminals out of jail early so that he could fund this program. This along with millions of dollars for the Sheriff’s already existing programs is contained in the “new homeless plan.”

Speaking of jail, the plan also calls for criminals released from jail to be delivered to these shelters. We now know they serve less than 10% of their sentence. Do you believe 10% is long enough to have rehabilitated them so that we can place them with folks who are not criminals but are just homeless seeking a safe environment? Remember being homeless is not a crime!

There is also a cry that we will be moving the homeless out of the concentrated area on skid row and into your backyard. Truth be known and believe me it is to those who live in areas affected by mass homeless population, they are already there.

Just look at some stats on how many and where they are:

Antelope Valley 3,544
San Fernando Valley 11,275
San Gabriel Valley 9,254
West Los Angeles 6,860
South Los Angeles 16,787
East Los Angeles 7,178
South Bay/Harbor 7,369
Downtown 20,023.

So everyone already has more than there fair share given the demographics.

Does downtown need less and let’s say the San Fernando Valley needs more than the 11,275 it already has?

Now, let’s look at who will be administer this new plan. The report lists the head honcho as the “ Homeless and Service Enriched Housing Initiatives Coordinator” Great title, sound Gandhi like. Maybe that is why they will begin at $148,000 per year!

How about the Social Security Administration Liaisons? We need two at $65,000 each. The social workers at those five centers will earn $61,424 each, and for Housing Locators to assist in overcoming, obtaining and maintaining permanent housing it’s $400,000 per year.

A few more items:: Create Housing Data base- $382,000, DPSS Applications at County Jail-$1,097.000,Genreal Relief Management Program-$4,052,000,Applications at Medical Centers Pilot-$588,000. It goes on and on and on.

Do you wonder why has no one been working with the homeless prior to the Video?

Answer, there has been a LA Homeless Service Authority in place since 1994, or 12 years for those of you who are not near a calculator. They are comprised of ten Commissioners and are a joint body made up of five appointees from the Mayor and five from the Supervisors. In June of 2005 the county gave them $20,000,000 more in funding above their existing funds. What have they been doing? They distribute $60,000,000 to 80 agencies for more than 120 programs for the homeless. Well guess what, it is not working! If it was than we would not be in the state we are now.

Finally, does this new plan call for the dismantling of the failed LAHSA? NO! They became a partner and maintain their autonomy.

So there you have a glimpse of what was passed. What do you think? Proactive or reactive? Real reform or Politics and Special Interest as Usual?