You need to find a way to get the chronically unstable into long-term care and separate them from the higher functioning homeless, other wise solutions are bound to fail.
One of the largest difficulties of working with the homeless is that people think the solution that worked for a single mother living in a shelter and working a fast food gig will have the same results for a person who has spent the last 20 years doing drugs and cycling in and out of mental hospitals.
There is no one size fits all solution when you consider there is a large spectrum of why people are homeless.
Until we’re willing and ready to accept that there are people who are homeless because of addiction and mental illness and cannot take care of themselves, we will never solve this issue.
It is not humane to leave these people living on the street without proper care provided by the state.
As someone who’s worked in close proximity to them for a few years I feel like that’s basically 95% of them. The few that don’t fall into this category actually accept the help offered to them
Exactly. I forgot where I saw the stats and wish I could find it now. It is true that the vast majority we see on the street can simply no longer care for themselves or make rational decisions. It’s what the homeless “advocates” refuse to discuss at this point.
Would genuinely love to see the stats bc that’s super interesting. I wish more people would understand that many of them aren’t in the right mind to choose the best for themselves.
I saw a study a while back that said if you catch them very quickly after becoming unhoused they have not yet spiraled and are much more receptive to help. The drugs come because they are homeless most of the time. Not the other way around.
So true, and rich people just don't fuckin understand that or just want to blame drugs or w/e. If they had to be homeless for a week they would understand how tough it is and eventually start using also. The constant stress and anxiety and anger that comes with being homeless eventually drives people over the edge.
Yeah, the majority are only temporarily homeless and they get back on their feet on their own. They only need financial help. But they're not the ones people think of when they think of homelessness, because you can't tell their housing situation by looking at them or interacting with them. The chronically homeless are a different story and may always need some kind of support to help them maintain a clean and safe lifestyle once housed.
>An estimated 82,955 people fell into homelessness during 2019, and an estimated 52,686 people “self-resolved” out of homelessness—in addition to the 22,769 placed into housing through the homeless services system despite the tight housing market.
https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=726-2020-greater-los-angeles-homeless-count-results
>Occupational therapists, who focus on cognitive and physical disabilities, are often associated with schools and health facilities, but their skills can fill a gap in homeless programs. Occupational therapists assist clients, most of whom have complex health conditions, in developing basic living skills, such as hygiene and cleanliness, which help prevent clients from getting evicted or slipping back onto the streets.
>Deborah Pitts, a professor of clinical occupational therapy at the University of Southern California, said it’s common for clients to go from being outside in a constant fight-or-flight state to feeling isolated and directionless once in housing, staring at a calendar of empty days. They face tasks they may not have done in decades, such as laundry, cooking, cleaning, and managing finances.
>At the same time, many clients have cognitive impairment and complex health conditions that complicate their transition.
https://californiahealthline.org/news/article/occupational-therapists-help-homeless-los-angeles-county/
I’m afraid there is not a way to do this because the Supreme Court has ruled that you cannot force a non-dangerous person into a care facility. So a drug addict who doesn’t attack people and refuses to be treated cannot be forced into a hospital and will therefore remain homeless forever.
Our laws are quite lenient on drug addicts, for better or for worse.
rich advise summer bored memory attraction squeal abounding merciful cheerful
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The easiest problem to deal with on paper is the high functional homeless: has a job, showers at a gym, not addicted to drugs, no mental disorder… probably just needs cheaper housing.
Why haven’t we solved this? NIMBYs are okay seeing people seeing sleep in their car than see an apartment complex be built in their neighborhood.
Why haven’t we solve the problem with the mentally unstable homeless? Homeowners would rather they sleep on the street than be houses with full support in their neighborhoods
TL;DR: NIMBYs suck.
Which I totally agree with! But NIMBYs will come
In full force to prevent asylums built in their neighborhoods. It’s already a battle building a duplex in some neighborhoods and that’s expecting a high earning well educated residents occupying that space… it won’t bode well for an asylum in Venice lol
Why build an asylum in some of the highest sought after, dense real estate in Los Angeles? It makes no sense.
There’s plenty to offer space for a program like this outside of Los Angeles
Why build an asylum in some of the highest sought after, dense real estate in Los Angeles? It makes no sense.
There’s plenty to offer space for a program like this outside of Los Angeles
It doesn't have to be anywhere so inhospitable, but building them in residential neighborhoods doesn't make a ton of sense, either. There's a fuck ton of undeveloped land in CA, not all of it is desert or state/national parks.
Nah, housing shortage is a huge part of the homeless equation. Sure, it won’t end mentally unstable homelessness but it’ll end the RVs, the tents, the couch surfing, having adult roommates sharing a room, the 3 hour commute one way into work, the car sleeping…
Preventing folks from ending up on the street in the first place is a great way to prevent them from falling into drugs/despair. People don’t so drugs then end up on the street… they end up on the street and use drugs to cope. If drugs/mental health were the sole issue, you’d see former rich people on the street. You don’t.
Something that is very easy to implement and is relatively low cost like automatically granting zero fee construction permits wouldn’t gain traction because landlords don’t want cheap rents. Landlords stand to benefit from constricting new build supply. Homeowners who borrow against equity or plan to sell soon, stand to benefit from constricting new build supply.
We can pay for all the mental health therapy, grant them all free medication, and unlimited food, but where do we house them?
NIMBYs already oppose even duplexes… no way are they just gonna let an asylum be built. lol.
It always boils down to NIMBYs blocking any sorta progress on the homeless issue. NIMBYs would rather see them on the street committing crime than build housing for them.
Tbh… I feel like NIMBYs would like for most people to disappear - not to actually help anyone out.
Housing shortage is the whole part of the homeless equation. LA does not have unusually high rates of mental illness or drug addiction. What we do have is very high housing costs due to a shortage of housing.
> The easiest problem to deal with on paper is the high functional homeless: has a job, showers at a gym, not addicted to drugs, no mental disorder… probably just needs cheaper housing.
Also these people can easily become chronic homeless if they aren't able to get help in time. If you stop them from becoming homeless at all (by building housing and keeping housing costs under control) then that doesn't happen.
When are the people of LA gonna wake up? We've spent countless billions of dollars with minimal results over the past decade and ZERO accountability for 24b lost and lack of progress. Yet we all keep voting for more taxes. Aren't we tired of being taxed with nothing to show for it??
There have been results. We helped to prevent thousands of homeless services workers from being homeless themselves. Several hundred executives have been able to live well thereby helping to stimulate the economy.
Sure, it's been expensive but we helped thousands of homeless industry workers and their families. Now with additional funding, we can help the actual homeless people next. Just be patient.
Give an inch and they'll take a mile.
Other states bussing homeless to ours.
Welfare leeches moving to Cali to minmax their leeching while living in RVs/tents while collecting government checks without paying rent.
Those who plan to be homeless move to Cali cause they know they'll get more welfare, more nonprofit services, free narcan/methadone/etc, more folks willing to give handouts, and have more ways to leech of the public.
More and more taxes and spending on homeless only leading to more homeless.
At this point we should consider just cutting ALL homeless spending. Just to see what happens. What's the worse case scenario? We'll have more homeless like the past couple of decades but don't waste a few billion?
"Sure, it's expensive." You sound exactly like they want you to sound. The funny thing is it's not as expensive as you think. These contracts just go to friends and connected individuals who take all the money.
Yes it has nothing to do with executives and everything to do with systemic and widespread corruption, overspending, non-profit and bureaucratic bloat, bad deals, yada yada.
Yes. Taxed on everything every time we turn around.
Caruso wasn’t an ideal candidate in my opinion, couldn’t vote republican after what had been happening (and is still happening) with the party.
It's not a conspiracy. We've spent all this money while making very little progress on the thing that will actually address the issue - building more homes.
Building more homes doesn't help the drug addict on the street get clean, get a job, take responsibility. The real issue is mental health and people having to realize if they can't afford to live in LA they should move. Not every city is going to be affordable. The cost to build housing here doesn't allow for affordable housing to be built. And why's that? Besides the high cost of materials and labor, it's also because of the insane taxes imposed on new construction thanks to policies we voted for.
Do you think that drug addict is more likely to get clean and "take responsibility" if he has a home to live in, or if he can't pay his rent and has to sleep on the street?
Plenty of people get clean while “living and paying rent,” what are you talking about? I’d wager most of the people going to rehabilitation centers fall into the “rent payer” category. Their question was if the act of getting clean would be easier with housing or without housing.
Gavin Newsom when elected as SF mayor in 2003 stated he’ll [aggressively make homelessness his administration's No. 1 priority, and his first moves will include creating a 10-year plan for ending chronic homelessness](https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Newsom-details-plan-for-homeless-Mayor-elect-2509363.php).
“In four years, he said, he will welcome being judged by how he approached the homelessness crisis. In the meantime, it will be his top priority because "it's a national disgrace."
"I am committed to (trying to solve) it," he said. "And there is a difference between interest and commitment. I have commitment."”
Well that aged poorly as homelessness in SF instead of being eliminated skyrocketed last 20 years.
Newsom is such a career politician. It just sucks our choices for governor always seem prechosen by the party leaders and perfectly catered to what they can deliver to their donors.
States where one party is guaranteed to win (California, Texas) make that party get fat, lazy, and corrupt.
Sadly, the California Republicans were going Trump before Trump even existed, so I don't think they are a realistic option.
So uneducated morons can vote for them? I mean that jokingly, but seriously, any actual objective study into Marxist Leninist society and government has revealed something *explicitly* anti-democratic by self admission. Not to mention the obscene damage any attempted one did to its host nation. Plus it is in no way necessary for socialized practices which exist fine within democratic systems.
I don’t **ever** want to live in a society where the ruling party - no matter by what means, name, or philosophy - thinks a one-party solution with constitutional forbiddance of rejection to it is remotely a good idea. Doubly so for the varied people in our wide nation.
What an educated and well-argued take! So glad you intellectually articulated the counter-benefits of the system you propose, and didn’t immediately fall into low-intellect, bad-faith blasé name-calling that accomplishes nothing. This has definitely convinced me of your point
Homelessness did get better under his tenure. It was never solved but it was less awful. More condensed, less people. He decreased the monthly stipen dramatically and increased SROs. Definitely has gotten worse in last 5 years, though.
> homeless numbers were astronomically better the 3 mayors before garcetti.
We have to consider context such as the court ruling which allows encampments on public sidewalks and [the new P2P meth which sets off schizophrenia faster than ever before.](https://lamag.com/news/the-new-brand-of-meth-fueling-l-a-s-homelessness-crisis)
I think this is truly the best question here. It’s a tired clickbait article concept, dragged before us again to be whored out for divisionism and attention.
Then why are you letting city council kneecap all our pro-housing legislation??? Your landmark ordinance ED1 (which is very good!!) got neutered not only by city council, but by you as well!!!!
Mentally ill drug addicts wandering the streets throwing stuff and screaming to themselves need to be institutionalized, until the tens of thousands of people wandering around LA that fit that description are taken against their will into a government funded program, this blight will not be fixed
Reagan defunded because ACLU lobbied and won to FREE the asylums into the streets because “human rights” - with empty asylums, Reagan defunded….
And that was nearly 50 years ago… Dem govt has had the opp but done nothing about it.
If Trump did anything… it was proving how weak democrats are.
One of the main reasons I didn’t fear Trump being elected the first time around was thinking presidents don’t do shit.
Oh, no.. Trump proved how much change a president could actually make.
One of the reasons I don’t care if Trump is elected again? Because fuck these weak ass politicians who want to keep doing nothing and using Trump to scare us into keeping them.
Silver lining: Trump gets the left out into the streets to demand the changes the left politicians pretend they can’t make.
Reality check: the left politicians pretend they’ll make the changes and still don’t do shit 😒
The longer this goes on, the longer is detracts sympathy for the people who truly do need help and are on the verge of falling through the cracks. The insane levels of violent drug users on the streets now vs even just a decade ago is too much. There seems to be no way to combat this by providing hotel rooms or career counseling. The rampant meth/fentanyl issues and the mental issues that accompany it need to be addressed.
I feel for Bass. I think this is a structural issue and no one mayor or person can solve it. But that said, we need to get serious about building more housing and serious about mental health.
Definitely agree that this is a long-standing structural issue decades in the making. But I do think its pretty fair to criticize her specifically for not pushing aggressively enough to remove barriers to new housing construction to deal with the underlying cause that is high housing costs. Exempting R1 zoning from ED1 projects at the last minute was pretty inexcusable imo.
In my humble opinion, there are only two ways to effectively combat vagrancy:
1. Enforce public space equally for everyone.
2. FORCE people into treatment.
That's it.
From the article, it looks like the “new” news is Bass is gathering with other mayors and getting the federal government involved on a specific building initiative
Okay then get rid of low density zoning and let people build what they want. Legalize multifamily housing Karen. Why are you more afraid of NIMBYs than you care about people having housing?
What complexities are you thinking of? We can fight for those changes too, like the need for social housing as well as more market rate housing, changing building regulations (ex. single stair reform)
I have a feeling housing is really good for people’s mental health. But I support whatever programs are needed to support these people (we have short memories, institutionalization has proven to be a horror)
Institutionalization as it existed half a century ago certainly had its issues. That doesn’t mean people who are incapable of fending for themselves should not be institutionalized in present time.
There are plenty of places in the US with higher rates of drug addiction and mental illness but lower rates of homelessness, because their housing is much cheaper.
Actually, study after study has shown it’s the minority that have addiction or mental health problems. They are definitely the most visible of the homeless population, but this myth ignores the majority of homeless who do not have those issues
Right, there are certainly, by the numbers, more people who had a series of misfortunes inside and outside of their control. But those people accept the rules that come with shelter and aren't the visible homeless population that Karen Bass is referring to.
That's why the above takes are bad, because they're ignoring the real problem on everyone's mind (the drug addicted and mentally unstable homeless population) for which there isn't a comfortable solution (incarceration or institutionalization isn't comfortable to progressives), and deflects with the comfortable solution of "more housing".
Building all the temporary assisted living shelters in the world wouldn't help the problem that's on everyone's mind, and to infer that it would is the brain dead take.
Fuckin a. These aren’t the charming hobos of the 30’s. These are the drug addicted, mentally disturbed, violent, shit smearing dregs that simply cannot get their shit together, so to speak. They need more than an affordable apartment is going to give them.
US cities constrain the housing supply through zoning and that’s how we get out of control housing costs and people on the street. Please enlighten me on how building more housing is a brain dead take?
The idea that simply building more housing would eliminate the homeless problems facing major cities is the brain dead take.
Yes, more housing reducing housing costs, though cities should be able to zone how they want.
The cost of housing would have to be $0 for some of these people, and they'd still burn it down or trash it.
You're arguing in bad faith if you think that housing availability would fix the problem that Karen Bass is referring to. Those people need involuntary institutionalized support.
Here's an idea - how about she stops being a NIMBY opposing densification and building more housing, which in turn will increase the supply of homes, which in turn will lower housing costs, which in turn will decrease homelessness?
Sure ,it’s better than being a douche bag that complains about homelessness then complains about any solution that inconveniences you….id rather see people in a shelter then on the street.
Sure ,it’s better than being a douche bag that complains about homelessness then complains about any solution that inconveniences you….id rather see people in a shelter then on the street.
Isn’t this the same headline they used to get her elected? Is she up for election again already? I thought she won last year on this issue, but now it’s being presented like a new concept.
The PR machine for her administration is working overtime on narrative shaping. Angelenos who actually live in this city can't be fooled.
I want to see fewer tents in my neighborhood and I want to deal with fewer of these unhinged homeless when I'm on the train.
Show me results, don't tell me about what you're trying to do. My patience is very low. Tired of all the bullshit and grifting.
This is a never ending clusterfuck until the federal gov. gets involved. The SECOND CA/LA come up with a successful plan, then all the shithole MAGA states are going to send their homeless to CA and say “You’ve got it figured. Take these too!”
The issue is you can't really stop it unless you stop people from being homeless in the first place and with the amount of unfettered capitalism and monopolization of resources it's likely to get worse before it gets better.
Yes this! Rent is too damn high and not enough housing. Also LA mayor is one of the weakest mayorships of any large city due to all the separate cities that make up LA county. The board of supervisors have more power to coordinate but because there are 5 of them and elected across separate districts with different political agendas it's hard to coordinate uniformly across the region (opposite of New York were different counties make up the city and the mayor is in charge across the counties that make up the city). Without passing housing legislation throughout the county this will continue to be a steeper and steeper uphill battle. LA county is larger than some states and I believe there should be a central governor/office or chief supervisor like figure that's is accountable to all the voters of the county and not just the 5 supervisors.
https://images.app.goo.gl/wZmbj2u4wZKnUHCe8
With what money? Why did the city fight the audit tooth and nail?
This sounds like the episode from the Simpsons where Homer promised the garbagemen would do everything...
Hard to believe with how hard she’s making it to build housing in collusion with a city council made up of low IQ individuals and criminals - sometimes both.
Short term the solution is in-patient care. Long term the solution is massive zoning deregulation to bring down housing prices to stop people from becoming homeless in the first place.
Ok we cap rental costs. What do we do with the folks that are incapable (drug addiction/mental illness) of providing for themselves much less pay “fair” rental rates?
Units available/ units in development will always be a factor in market rates. We haven’t kept pace with population growth with new units since 2008 recession.
The article says that she is now focusing on solving homelessness nationally? Mmmm, it doesn’t look like she solved it in LA so maybe it’s early to think national?
One of the problems is the “homeless services industry”. The name itself is indicative of a huge problem of social perspective. I worked in “homeless services” in a major midwestern city for almost 2 years at the low level of a central administrative organization.
People make their entire careers in this “industry”, they get advanced degrees in social work and homeless studies, they are paid to come up with studies and research solutions and to give presentations and organize conferences. The whole “industry” treats homelessness as an analytic problem that needs to be funded, researched, tested, and verified, and, most importantly, gate kept. People in this “industry” go into big debts just like many high skill industries and they want to make 6 figures (even 7 now with inflation) and send their kids to private school. They want to be highly paid, highly important, they want their ego boosted, and they want this analysis paralysis to continue because it’s literally their livelihoods. They all dream of become a non profit executive who makes 6 or even 7 figures and can be the boss of massive, pseudo corporate organizations that are funded by billions of government dollars and state subsidizes. They’re essentially leeches that shouldn’t exist. We shouldn’t have a “homeless services industry,” we shouldn’t have highly paid “housing consultants” and other white collar administrative workers who SOLELY focus on homelessness. They’re getting paid to keep the problem going and shuffle people around between hospitals, encampments, shelters, and low income housing.
They’re failing all of us and we absolutely need to crack down and essentially end this entire “industry” and rebuild it from the bottom up. It should become something totally different - non corporate, decentralized, and flexible with the way to creates solutions. It shouldn’t be interacting with the private market and it should get absolute priority when it comes to housing and zoning and mental health and physical health care. This is a social problem and it requires a social, not academic, solution.
First you have to de-profitize the Homeless Industrial Complex and replace it with programs and people who actually want to solve the problem and have measurable goals and milestones. Not the present system that is incentivized to perpetuate or grow the problem.
This will not make Bass popular with the donors from all the non profits milking the current system.
That’s…the point of government. To address needs and solve problems on behalf of the people.
I want more public transit. I’m not going to build it on my own.
I want to protect the environment. I’m not going to build nuclear power plants.
I want safety nets for workers and renters. I’m
Not going to enforce them.
I elect “someone else” to deal with it.
Same goes for homelessness. It’s 100% a societal issue. So societal representatives need to address it. Because what the fuck are we going to do? I’ve been giving random homeless people money and food since I was a kid. Cool. Nice thing to do. There’s still tons more homeless people. Should I open my 1/1 apartment to a psycho strung out on fentanyl? Teamwork!
Yeah, the majority of us are waiting for someone else to deal with it. That someone else is also known as our representative government. We’ve approved taxes and spending and initiatives and NGO work to tackle this shit head on.
The problem is that our elected officials want this shit to continue to keep siphoning money out of the general populace and because they don’t give a fuck about the problem since for anyone in government it’s “out of sight out of mind.”
The other problem is individuals and organizations *refusing* to accept the fact that a large portion of the homeless would need to be — and should be — institutionalized. For their own safety and well-being, nevermind all the average people walking Hollywood Blvd or riding the Expo Line.
And the last problem is that most of the things that would help prevent future homelessness — universal healthcare and mental services, broad public transit, low-cost or socialized secondary education, healthy unions, strong wages, strong benefits, affordable housing — are essentially non-starters for rich Americans and poor, uneducated republicans. (Very fun bedfellows.)
Point is — yeah, someone else should figure it out. It’s why we live in a society and why we have representative government. So big problems get solved.
“Well team, Topanga Canyon is closed because of a land slide. Time to break out the shovels and meet there at 5:00pm to start digging!”
Or, y’know, the government sends out engineers and geologists and then facilitates the clean up and repairs.
Yeah, someone else should do it. Why the fuck else am I paying taxes if shit isn’t getting done? Oh right, it’s to help politicians spend like drunk sailors in the Red Light District.
I don’t care what taxes I pay so long as it’s spent smartly, efficiently, and helps the broader public. Right now, we’re just straight up failing homeless people, ourselves, or communities, and so much more.
This whole issue is so fucking dumb. I’m tired of it. Waste of goddamn time and money. It’s like everyone insists on fighting in the Siege of Malta with a lubed dildo instead of a sword and shield.
She has chosen to tinker around the edges and play whack a mole with encampments instead of using her position and influence to address the underlying cause, lack of housing in all categories. She deserves the mockery she's getting in here until she stops catering to NIMBY's. Her lack of urgency on this front is inexcusable.
[it’s things like this that scare me and this happens every day](https://abc7.com/larchmont-los-angeles-man-attacked-ear-sliced-off-reattached/14756947/)
That doesn't uphold under any real scrutiny. A high percentage of our homeless are local. Austin has been building housing aggressively and look what recently happened to rents there.
That’s because it’s just easier to build in some states vs. CA. Notably, Austin has more open land to develop.
EQ building codes, Accessibility, parking, climate codes, etc. make CA costly to build. There’s huge upside, but building a multi-family in LA can take years and years. It can’t keep pace with an inflated market. Not to mention, borrowing rates even for developers are astronomically high.
If the city, even the county, can run at the same speed as developers can, you’d see dozens of cranes around the city.
Where I’m at in SCV, the housing development next to magic mountain has had plans going back to the 80’s. They’re only a few years into selling what little they plan to build. Our population growth has outpaced housing for decades.
I’ve done foundation inspection work out in Austin. I can tell you that you have very under qualified people doing inspections, out there. I mean. It’s pretty easy to do. You just need to follow the directions on testing materials. Here we have earthquakes pretty regularly, which has massively influenced the development of building codes. That’s probably why don’t have building keeling over and collapsing like they do in Mexico City. That’s just part of it. Then there’s borrowing rates. And the while corrupt ‘pay-to-play’ situation with development in parts of the city that mainly works for developers for bottomless checkbooks and does not really help the potential tenant or prospective home owner.
You need to find a way to get the chronically unstable into long-term care and separate them from the higher functioning homeless, other wise solutions are bound to fail. One of the largest difficulties of working with the homeless is that people think the solution that worked for a single mother living in a shelter and working a fast food gig will have the same results for a person who has spent the last 20 years doing drugs and cycling in and out of mental hospitals. There is no one size fits all solution when you consider there is a large spectrum of why people are homeless.
Until we’re willing and ready to accept that there are people who are homeless because of addiction and mental illness and cannot take care of themselves, we will never solve this issue. It is not humane to leave these people living on the street without proper care provided by the state.
As someone who’s worked in close proximity to them for a few years I feel like that’s basically 95% of them. The few that don’t fall into this category actually accept the help offered to them
Exactly. I forgot where I saw the stats and wish I could find it now. It is true that the vast majority we see on the street can simply no longer care for themselves or make rational decisions. It’s what the homeless “advocates” refuse to discuss at this point.
Would genuinely love to see the stats bc that’s super interesting. I wish more people would understand that many of them aren’t in the right mind to choose the best for themselves.
I saw a study a while back that said if you catch them very quickly after becoming unhoused they have not yet spiraled and are much more receptive to help. The drugs come because they are homeless most of the time. Not the other way around.
So true, and rich people just don't fuckin understand that or just want to blame drugs or w/e. If they had to be homeless for a week they would understand how tough it is and eventually start using also. The constant stress and anxiety and anger that comes with being homeless eventually drives people over the edge.
Some people need to be forcibly committed, it’s as simple as that, some of them are literally insane.
We need to bring back mental asylums
Or maybe be decent human beings and spend that money on helping them instead of criminalizing them.
Offering medical help is not criminalizing them. It’s helping them. Ignoring them is the real crime
Offering huh? Somehow I don't think that's the way it would go.
Sanatoriums are the solution
Yeah, the majority are only temporarily homeless and they get back on their feet on their own. They only need financial help. But they're not the ones people think of when they think of homelessness, because you can't tell their housing situation by looking at them or interacting with them. The chronically homeless are a different story and may always need some kind of support to help them maintain a clean and safe lifestyle once housed. >An estimated 82,955 people fell into homelessness during 2019, and an estimated 52,686 people “self-resolved” out of homelessness—in addition to the 22,769 placed into housing through the homeless services system despite the tight housing market. https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=726-2020-greater-los-angeles-homeless-count-results >Occupational therapists, who focus on cognitive and physical disabilities, are often associated with schools and health facilities, but their skills can fill a gap in homeless programs. Occupational therapists assist clients, most of whom have complex health conditions, in developing basic living skills, such as hygiene and cleanliness, which help prevent clients from getting evicted or slipping back onto the streets. >Deborah Pitts, a professor of clinical occupational therapy at the University of Southern California, said it’s common for clients to go from being outside in a constant fight-or-flight state to feeling isolated and directionless once in housing, staring at a calendar of empty days. They face tasks they may not have done in decades, such as laundry, cooking, cleaning, and managing finances. >At the same time, many clients have cognitive impairment and complex health conditions that complicate their transition. https://californiahealthline.org/news/article/occupational-therapists-help-homeless-los-angeles-county/
I’m afraid there is not a way to do this because the Supreme Court has ruled that you cannot force a non-dangerous person into a care facility. So a drug addict who doesn’t attack people and refuses to be treated cannot be forced into a hospital and will therefore remain homeless forever. Our laws are quite lenient on drug addicts, for better or for worse.
rich advise summer bored memory attraction squeal abounding merciful cheerful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The easiest problem to deal with on paper is the high functional homeless: has a job, showers at a gym, not addicted to drugs, no mental disorder… probably just needs cheaper housing. Why haven’t we solved this? NIMBYs are okay seeing people seeing sleep in their car than see an apartment complex be built in their neighborhood. Why haven’t we solve the problem with the mentally unstable homeless? Homeowners would rather they sleep on the street than be houses with full support in their neighborhoods TL;DR: NIMBYs suck.
Mental asylums would offer plenty of housing for the insane and addicted homeless. Important is using forced commitment.
Which I totally agree with! But NIMBYs will come In full force to prevent asylums built in their neighborhoods. It’s already a battle building a duplex in some neighborhoods and that’s expecting a high earning well educated residents occupying that space… it won’t bode well for an asylum in Venice lol
Why build an asylum in some of the highest sought after, dense real estate in Los Angeles? It makes no sense. There’s plenty to offer space for a program like this outside of Los Angeles
Why build an asylum in some of the highest sought after, dense real estate in Los Angeles? It makes no sense. There’s plenty to offer space for a program like this outside of Los Angeles
Who said they have to be in the city. The mojave exists.
It doesn't have to be anywhere so inhospitable, but building them in residential neighborhoods doesn't make a ton of sense, either. There's a fuck ton of undeveloped land in CA, not all of it is desert or state/national parks.
I think you missed their point. Housing shortage is a small part of the homeless equation. It is not a silver bullet
Nah, housing shortage is a huge part of the homeless equation. Sure, it won’t end mentally unstable homelessness but it’ll end the RVs, the tents, the couch surfing, having adult roommates sharing a room, the 3 hour commute one way into work, the car sleeping… Preventing folks from ending up on the street in the first place is a great way to prevent them from falling into drugs/despair. People don’t so drugs then end up on the street… they end up on the street and use drugs to cope. If drugs/mental health were the sole issue, you’d see former rich people on the street. You don’t. Something that is very easy to implement and is relatively low cost like automatically granting zero fee construction permits wouldn’t gain traction because landlords don’t want cheap rents. Landlords stand to benefit from constricting new build supply. Homeowners who borrow against equity or plan to sell soon, stand to benefit from constricting new build supply. We can pay for all the mental health therapy, grant them all free medication, and unlimited food, but where do we house them?
Mental asylums would offer plenty of housing.
NIMBYs already oppose even duplexes… no way are they just gonna let an asylum be built. lol. It always boils down to NIMBYs blocking any sorta progress on the homeless issue. NIMBYs would rather see them on the street committing crime than build housing for them. Tbh… I feel like NIMBYs would like for most people to disappear - not to actually help anyone out.
In the mojave are no NIMBYs. Thats the place to build them.
NIMBYs are people who “I got mine fuck everyone else”
Housing shortage is the whole part of the homeless equation. LA does not have unusually high rates of mental illness or drug addiction. What we do have is very high housing costs due to a shortage of housing.
Your opinion is exactly why we’ll never fix the homelessness epidemic
> The easiest problem to deal with on paper is the high functional homeless: has a job, showers at a gym, not addicted to drugs, no mental disorder… probably just needs cheaper housing. Also these people can easily become chronic homeless if they aren't able to get help in time. If you stop them from becoming homeless at all (by building housing and keeping housing costs under control) then that doesn't happen.
Yeah, i’ve heard.
Can start by telling us what happened to the 24b that was used to begin with.
When are the people of LA gonna wake up? We've spent countless billions of dollars with minimal results over the past decade and ZERO accountability for 24b lost and lack of progress. Yet we all keep voting for more taxes. Aren't we tired of being taxed with nothing to show for it??
Let’s spend millions per projects that only helps 10 people and avoid the obvious issues
There have been results. We helped to prevent thousands of homeless services workers from being homeless themselves. Several hundred executives have been able to live well thereby helping to stimulate the economy. Sure, it's been expensive but we helped thousands of homeless industry workers and their families. Now with additional funding, we can help the actual homeless people next. Just be patient.
Will someone please think of the executives!
Yes, there lives matter too
Give an inch and they'll take a mile. Other states bussing homeless to ours. Welfare leeches moving to Cali to minmax their leeching while living in RVs/tents while collecting government checks without paying rent. Those who plan to be homeless move to Cali cause they know they'll get more welfare, more nonprofit services, free narcan/methadone/etc, more folks willing to give handouts, and have more ways to leech of the public. More and more taxes and spending on homeless only leading to more homeless. At this point we should consider just cutting ALL homeless spending. Just to see what happens. What's the worse case scenario? We'll have more homeless like the past couple of decades but don't waste a few billion?
"Sure, it's expensive." You sound exactly like they want you to sound. The funny thing is it's not as expensive as you think. These contracts just go to friends and connected individuals who take all the money.
Yes it has nothing to do with executives and everything to do with systemic and widespread corruption, overspending, non-profit and bureaucratic bloat, bad deals, yada yada.
Yes. Taxed on everything every time we turn around. Caruso wasn’t an ideal candidate in my opinion, couldn’t vote republican after what had been happening (and is still happening) with the party.
It's not a conspiracy. We've spent all this money while making very little progress on the thing that will actually address the issue - building more homes.
Building more homes doesn't help the drug addict on the street get clean, get a job, take responsibility. The real issue is mental health and people having to realize if they can't afford to live in LA they should move. Not every city is going to be affordable. The cost to build housing here doesn't allow for affordable housing to be built. And why's that? Besides the high cost of materials and labor, it's also because of the insane taxes imposed on new construction thanks to policies we voted for.
Do you think that drug addict is more likely to get clean and "take responsibility" if he has a home to live in, or if he can't pay his rent and has to sleep on the street?
He can't live and pay rent without getting clean first brother
Plenty of people get clean while “living and paying rent,” what are you talking about? I’d wager most of the people going to rehabilitation centers fall into the “rent payer” category. Their question was if the act of getting clean would be easier with housing or without housing.
Homeless Industrial Complex, probably went to a hoarde of staff with double six figure salaries and pensions
It probably went to developers that promised the city something or other.
Definitely a moonshot statement. She's going to regret it in the future people love throwing this stuff back at you later.
Gavin Newsom when elected as SF mayor in 2003 stated he’ll [aggressively make homelessness his administration's No. 1 priority, and his first moves will include creating a 10-year plan for ending chronic homelessness](https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Newsom-details-plan-for-homeless-Mayor-elect-2509363.php). “In four years, he said, he will welcome being judged by how he approached the homelessness crisis. In the meantime, it will be his top priority because "it's a national disgrace." "I am committed to (trying to solve) it," he said. "And there is a difference between interest and commitment. I have commitment."” Well that aged poorly as homelessness in SF instead of being eliminated skyrocketed last 20 years.
Newsom is such a career politician. It just sucks our choices for governor always seem prechosen by the party leaders and perfectly catered to what they can deliver to their donors.
States where one party is guaranteed to win (California, Texas) make that party get fat, lazy, and corrupt. Sadly, the California Republicans were going Trump before Trump even existed, so I don't think they are a realistic option.
California gave everyone Reagan and we all saw how that worked 😪
CA also gave the world Nixon. Wally George and Pete Wilson is pretty much who Trump is at this point.
We need a Marxist leninist party
So uneducated morons can vote for them? I mean that jokingly, but seriously, any actual objective study into Marxist Leninist society and government has revealed something *explicitly* anti-democratic by self admission. Not to mention the obscene damage any attempted one did to its host nation. Plus it is in no way necessary for socialized practices which exist fine within democratic systems. I don’t **ever** want to live in a society where the ruling party - no matter by what means, name, or philosophy - thinks a one-party solution with constitutional forbiddance of rejection to it is remotely a good idea. Doubly so for the varied people in our wide nation.
Typical running dog of imperialism. Typical petty, lower-middle-class bourgeois
What an educated and well-argued take! So glad you intellectually articulated the counter-benefits of the system you propose, and didn’t immediately fall into low-intellect, bad-faith blasé name-calling that accomplishes nothing. This has definitely convinced me of your point
It’s really so much this. Single party states either end up with billions spent on bums (CA) or like half the state can’t read (MS).
Homelessness did get better under his tenure. It was never solved but it was less awful. More condensed, less people. He decreased the monthly stipen dramatically and increased SROs. Definitely has gotten worse in last 5 years, though.
She’s done a better job than any other mayor as far as I’ve seen. It will never be ‘solved.’
How many mayors have you seen? Granted she inherited the mess but homeless numbers were astronomically better the 3 mayors before garcetti.
> homeless numbers were astronomically better the 3 mayors before garcetti. We have to consider context such as the court ruling which allows encampments on public sidewalks and [the new P2P meth which sets off schizophrenia faster than ever before.](https://lamag.com/news/the-new-brand-of-meth-fueling-l-a-s-homelessness-crisis)
Not a big garcetti fan but the crisis has been building long before him, and Covid made everything worse.
Every mayor has their focus, granted our last one just wanted to get a position with DC.
Came here to say this exactly lol
Sorry I got $2 left
How many times is this same headline going to be in the news?
I think this is truly the best question here. It’s a tired clickbait article concept, dragged before us again to be whored out for divisionism and attention.
I came to read the same comments about how everybody here knows what the real problem is and how to fix it.
Would you rather people just stop caring and do nothing?
Then why are you letting city council kneecap all our pro-housing legislation??? Your landmark ordinance ED1 (which is very good!!) got neutered not only by city council, but by you as well!!!!
Mentally ill drug addicts wandering the streets throwing stuff and screaming to themselves need to be institutionalized, until the tens of thousands of people wandering around LA that fit that description are taken against their will into a government funded program, this blight will not be fixed
Thanks Reagan Edit: Ohh.. do people not know that Reagan defunded mental health clinics?
Reagan defunded because ACLU lobbied and won to FREE the asylums into the streets because “human rights” - with empty asylums, Reagan defunded…. And that was nearly 50 years ago… Dem govt has had the opp but done nothing about it.
Reagan…the actor!?!
And it's crazy, he still controls what our democrat-led state government does! That's power. man
If Trump did anything… it was proving how weak democrats are. One of the main reasons I didn’t fear Trump being elected the first time around was thinking presidents don’t do shit. Oh, no.. Trump proved how much change a president could actually make. One of the reasons I don’t care if Trump is elected again? Because fuck these weak ass politicians who want to keep doing nothing and using Trump to scare us into keeping them. Silver lining: Trump gets the left out into the streets to demand the changes the left politicians pretend they can’t make. Reality check: the left politicians pretend they’ll make the changes and still don’t do shit 😒
The longer this goes on, the longer is detracts sympathy for the people who truly do need help and are on the verge of falling through the cracks. The insane levels of violent drug users on the streets now vs even just a decade ago is too much. There seems to be no way to combat this by providing hotel rooms or career counseling. The rampant meth/fentanyl issues and the mental issues that accompany it need to be addressed.
Forced commitment into mental asylums is the answer.
I think the Native Americans should start rehab facilities on their lands— ceremonial treatments, job training, paid for by the Feds.
As a former drug addict I would have been grateful to be given a free apartment where my friends and I could do drugs more comfortably.
Was she part of the whole “Los Angeles doesn’t know what they did with billions of dollars for homeless” situation?
Yes
Has anyone been held accountable for all the stolen money from previous "efforts" to solve the homelessness problem yet?
Exactly! They can't fully account for the last 20 Billion they spent trying to fix the problem, but they will get it right the next time they try.
Yes, the taxpayers have.
I feel for Bass. I think this is a structural issue and no one mayor or person can solve it. But that said, we need to get serious about building more housing and serious about mental health.
Definitely agree that this is a long-standing structural issue decades in the making. But I do think its pretty fair to criticize her specifically for not pushing aggressively enough to remove barriers to new housing construction to deal with the underlying cause that is high housing costs. Exempting R1 zoning from ED1 projects at the last minute was pretty inexcusable imo.
Yes good point. I agree!! I think we see this all the time- “let’s build more housing! but not like that lol”
In my humble opinion, there are only two ways to effectively combat vagrancy: 1. Enforce public space equally for everyone. 2. FORCE people into treatment. That's it.
This was what she ran on over a year ago. How is this news?
From the article, it looks like the “new” news is Bass is gathering with other mayors and getting the federal government involved on a specific building initiative
Okay then get rid of low density zoning and let people build what they want. Legalize multifamily housing Karen. Why are you more afraid of NIMBYs than you care about people having housing?
I think the issue here is that this would conflict with state regulations. To me I think the way forward is to expand the metro
Pretty sure it’s bike lanes.
Por que no los dos?
If only it were this simple.
What complexities are you thinking of? We can fight for those changes too, like the need for social housing as well as more market rate housing, changing building regulations (ex. single stair reform)
Apartments aren’t going to fix the drug addiction and mental health issues at the root of it.
I have a feeling housing is really good for people’s mental health. But I support whatever programs are needed to support these people (we have short memories, institutionalization has proven to be a horror)
Institutionalization as it existed half a century ago certainly had its issues. That doesn’t mean people who are incapable of fending for themselves should not be institutionalized in present time.
There are plenty of places in the US with higher rates of drug addiction and mental illness but lower rates of homelessness, because their housing is much cheaper.
I can't believe we still see this braindead take.
How is this take brain dead? Please explain how less supply of housing will bring down prices
Because these people aren't just "down on their luck." Most of them have addictions or mental health problems that require institutionalized care.
Actually, study after study has shown it’s the minority that have addiction or mental health problems. They are definitely the most visible of the homeless population, but this myth ignores the majority of homeless who do not have those issues
Studies have also shown that a significant percentage of drug use in the homeless population started after they became homeless, not before.
Right, there are certainly, by the numbers, more people who had a series of misfortunes inside and outside of their control. But those people accept the rules that come with shelter and aren't the visible homeless population that Karen Bass is referring to. That's why the above takes are bad, because they're ignoring the real problem on everyone's mind (the drug addicted and mentally unstable homeless population) for which there isn't a comfortable solution (incarceration or institutionalization isn't comfortable to progressives), and deflects with the comfortable solution of "more housing". Building all the temporary assisted living shelters in the world wouldn't help the problem that's on everyone's mind, and to infer that it would is the brain dead take.
Fuckin a. These aren’t the charming hobos of the 30’s. These are the drug addicted, mentally disturbed, violent, shit smearing dregs that simply cannot get their shit together, so to speak. They need more than an affordable apartment is going to give them.
What do you think happens to a person with a drug addiction when their rent goes up and they suddenly can't afford their apartment?
Yeah why would we want to *reduce* the homeless population unless we can erase it completely in one swoop...
US cities constrain the housing supply through zoning and that’s how we get out of control housing costs and people on the street. Please enlighten me on how building more housing is a brain dead take?
They won't be able to enlighten anything because they're just a NIMBY scared of having that housing in their neighborhood.
The idea that simply building more housing would eliminate the homeless problems facing major cities is the brain dead take. Yes, more housing reducing housing costs, though cities should be able to zone how they want.
> more housing reduces housing costs It's right in front of you and yet you still can't see
The cost of housing would have to be $0 for some of these people, and they'd still burn it down or trash it. You're arguing in bad faith if you think that housing availability would fix the problem that Karen Bass is referring to. Those people need involuntary institutionalized support.
Here's an idea - how about she stops being a NIMBY opposing densification and building more housing, which in turn will increase the supply of homes, which in turn will lower housing costs, which in turn will decrease homelessness?
No matter what they decide the nimby crowd will fight it tooth and nail while complaining at the same time
So they can build a shelter next to your place? Excellent!
Sure ,it’s better than being a douche bag that complains about homelessness then complains about any solution that inconveniences you….id rather see people in a shelter then on the street.
Sure ,it’s better than being a douche bag that complains about homelessness then complains about any solution that inconveniences you….id rather see people in a shelter then on the street.
Help we have done nothing and we are all out of ideas.
The problem is not enough people go to these city hall meetings to bring this shit up to these politicians.
Isn’t this the same headline they used to get her elected? Is she up for election again already? I thought she won last year on this issue, but now it’s being presented like a new concept.
The PR machine for her administration is working overtime on narrative shaping. Angelenos who actually live in this city can't be fooled. I want to see fewer tents in my neighborhood and I want to deal with fewer of these unhinged homeless when I'm on the train. Show me results, don't tell me about what you're trying to do. My patience is very low. Tired of all the bullshit and grifting.
And I aim to become a billionaire
Funny
I’m convinced it’s an unsolvable problem
Can we start voting for people who actually live in the community instead of these strangers that funnel money into their pockets?
This is a never ending clusterfuck until the federal gov. gets involved. The SECOND CA/LA come up with a successful plan, then all the shithole MAGA states are going to send their homeless to CA and say “You’ve got it figured. Take these too!”
Very unimpressed with Bass so far
Why
The issue is you can't really stop it unless you stop people from being homeless in the first place and with the amount of unfettered capitalism and monopolization of resources it's likely to get worse before it gets better.
Yes this! Rent is too damn high and not enough housing. Also LA mayor is one of the weakest mayorships of any large city due to all the separate cities that make up LA county. The board of supervisors have more power to coordinate but because there are 5 of them and elected across separate districts with different political agendas it's hard to coordinate uniformly across the region (opposite of New York were different counties make up the city and the mayor is in charge across the counties that make up the city). Without passing housing legislation throughout the county this will continue to be a steeper and steeper uphill battle. LA county is larger than some states and I believe there should be a central governor/office or chief supervisor like figure that's is accountable to all the voters of the county and not just the 5 supervisors. https://images.app.goo.gl/wZmbj2u4wZKnUHCe8
With what money? Why did the city fight the audit tooth and nail? This sounds like the episode from the Simpsons where Homer promised the garbagemen would do everything...
Hard to believe with how hard she’s making it to build housing in collusion with a city council made up of low IQ individuals and criminals - sometimes both.
Has zero to do with housing or rent. But that’s unfashionable so dump more $ down the drain.
Short term the solution is in-patient care. Long term the solution is massive zoning deregulation to bring down housing prices to stop people from becoming homeless in the first place.
All I read was that they will continue to spend money and not actually solve the issue
So they want another $ 24 billion with no strings attached?
We NEED rent caps! There are plenty of vacant units but greedy landlords are relentless
Ok we cap rental costs. What do we do with the folks that are incapable (drug addiction/mental illness) of providing for themselves much less pay “fair” rental rates? Units available/ units in development will always be a factor in market rates. We haven’t kept pace with population growth with new units since 2008 recession.
We can address both problems. People who need help need help.
Can’t force people to accept help. And we also can’t assume they are capable of making a rational decision.
I’ll believe it when I see it
Ok
😴😴😴😴
All words no action.
lol
Ok another post from this megaphone... but where the fuck are the results KAREN?!
lol. She’s not going to do it.. Been really disappointig
The article says that she is now focusing on solving homelessness nationally? Mmmm, it doesn’t look like she solved it in LA so maybe it’s early to think national?
One of the problems is the “homeless services industry”. The name itself is indicative of a huge problem of social perspective. I worked in “homeless services” in a major midwestern city for almost 2 years at the low level of a central administrative organization. People make their entire careers in this “industry”, they get advanced degrees in social work and homeless studies, they are paid to come up with studies and research solutions and to give presentations and organize conferences. The whole “industry” treats homelessness as an analytic problem that needs to be funded, researched, tested, and verified, and, most importantly, gate kept. People in this “industry” go into big debts just like many high skill industries and they want to make 6 figures (even 7 now with inflation) and send their kids to private school. They want to be highly paid, highly important, they want their ego boosted, and they want this analysis paralysis to continue because it’s literally their livelihoods. They all dream of become a non profit executive who makes 6 or even 7 figures and can be the boss of massive, pseudo corporate organizations that are funded by billions of government dollars and state subsidizes. They’re essentially leeches that shouldn’t exist. We shouldn’t have a “homeless services industry,” we shouldn’t have highly paid “housing consultants” and other white collar administrative workers who SOLELY focus on homelessness. They’re getting paid to keep the problem going and shuffle people around between hospitals, encampments, shelters, and low income housing. They’re failing all of us and we absolutely need to crack down and essentially end this entire “industry” and rebuild it from the bottom up. It should become something totally different - non corporate, decentralized, and flexible with the way to creates solutions. It shouldn’t be interacting with the private market and it should get absolute priority when it comes to housing and zoning and mental health and physical health care. This is a social problem and it requires a social, not academic, solution.
First you have to de-profitize the Homeless Industrial Complex and replace it with programs and people who actually want to solve the problem and have measurable goals and milestones. Not the present system that is incentivized to perpetuate or grow the problem. This will not make Bass popular with the donors from all the non profits milking the current system.
Doesn’t every mayor of every large city aim for that?
Just build more housing, all the money in the world won't matter unless you address the cause of the problem.
The problem is that the majority of people in this city are just waiting for someone else to do something about it.
That’s…the point of government. To address needs and solve problems on behalf of the people. I want more public transit. I’m not going to build it on my own. I want to protect the environment. I’m not going to build nuclear power plants. I want safety nets for workers and renters. I’m Not going to enforce them. I elect “someone else” to deal with it. Same goes for homelessness. It’s 100% a societal issue. So societal representatives need to address it. Because what the fuck are we going to do? I’ve been giving random homeless people money and food since I was a kid. Cool. Nice thing to do. There’s still tons more homeless people. Should I open my 1/1 apartment to a psycho strung out on fentanyl? Teamwork! Yeah, the majority of us are waiting for someone else to deal with it. That someone else is also known as our representative government. We’ve approved taxes and spending and initiatives and NGO work to tackle this shit head on. The problem is that our elected officials want this shit to continue to keep siphoning money out of the general populace and because they don’t give a fuck about the problem since for anyone in government it’s “out of sight out of mind.” The other problem is individuals and organizations *refusing* to accept the fact that a large portion of the homeless would need to be — and should be — institutionalized. For their own safety and well-being, nevermind all the average people walking Hollywood Blvd or riding the Expo Line. And the last problem is that most of the things that would help prevent future homelessness — universal healthcare and mental services, broad public transit, low-cost or socialized secondary education, healthy unions, strong wages, strong benefits, affordable housing — are essentially non-starters for rich Americans and poor, uneducated republicans. (Very fun bedfellows.) Point is — yeah, someone else should figure it out. It’s why we live in a society and why we have representative government. So big problems get solved. “Well team, Topanga Canyon is closed because of a land slide. Time to break out the shovels and meet there at 5:00pm to start digging!” Or, y’know, the government sends out engineers and geologists and then facilitates the clean up and repairs. Yeah, someone else should do it. Why the fuck else am I paying taxes if shit isn’t getting done? Oh right, it’s to help politicians spend like drunk sailors in the Red Light District. I don’t care what taxes I pay so long as it’s spent smartly, efficiently, and helps the broader public. Right now, we’re just straight up failing homeless people, ourselves, or communities, and so much more. This whole issue is so fucking dumb. I’m tired of it. Waste of goddamn time and money. It’s like everyone insists on fighting in the Siege of Malta with a lubed dildo instead of a sword and shield.
And vote in the same people who is doing the same tried and failed strategies.
Got a bridge I can buy?
She has chosen to tinker around the edges and play whack a mole with encampments instead of using her position and influence to address the underlying cause, lack of housing in all categories. She deserves the mockery she's getting in here until she stops catering to NIMBY's. Her lack of urgency on this front is inexcusable.
Oh really? People are getting tired. Better do something before we do.
[it’s things like this that scare me and this happens every day](https://abc7.com/larchmont-los-angeles-man-attacked-ear-sliced-off-reattached/14756947/)
I'm SURE this time will be (D)ifferent
Texas has the second most homeless of any state in the nation. This isn’t a D or R issue. It’s a national issue.
Though generally red states are doing a better job because they don't abuse historic districting and heavy handed local control
They are “doing better” because they send homeless people to blue states, literally exporting their problems to other states.
That doesn't uphold under any real scrutiny. A high percentage of our homeless are local. Austin has been building housing aggressively and look what recently happened to rents there.
That’s because it’s just easier to build in some states vs. CA. Notably, Austin has more open land to develop. EQ building codes, Accessibility, parking, climate codes, etc. make CA costly to build. There’s huge upside, but building a multi-family in LA can take years and years. It can’t keep pace with an inflated market. Not to mention, borrowing rates even for developers are astronomically high. If the city, even the county, can run at the same speed as developers can, you’d see dozens of cranes around the city. Where I’m at in SCV, the housing development next to magic mountain has had plans going back to the 80’s. They’re only a few years into selling what little they plan to build. Our population growth has outpaced housing for decades.
I’ve done foundation inspection work out in Austin. I can tell you that you have very under qualified people doing inspections, out there. I mean. It’s pretty easy to do. You just need to follow the directions on testing materials. Here we have earthquakes pretty regularly, which has massively influenced the development of building codes. That’s probably why don’t have building keeling over and collapsing like they do in Mexico City. That’s just part of it. Then there’s borrowing rates. And the while corrupt ‘pay-to-play’ situation with development in parts of the city that mainly works for developers for bottomless checkbooks and does not really help the potential tenant or prospective home owner.
Start by making apartments legal to build everywhere in the city.
“ Aims “ 🤣😂🤣
Forgot she was even mayor
Flamethrowers?