PD Editorial: Finding a place for the homeless

Beginning in 2016, homeless people camping along Sonoma County's railroad tracks were evicted to make way for SMART's commuter trains.

The following year, authorities dismantled a large encampment in Santa Rosa known as homeless hill.

Since then, camps have popped up and been cleared out along the Petaluma River, beneath Highway 101 overpasses in downtown Santa Rosa, behind a shuttered discount store in Roseland and along the Joe Rodota Trail. A motley assortment of tents, campers and RVs in Santa Rosa's Northpoint Corporate Center probably will be next to go.

Then what?

“We can't do this forever,” Santa Rosa City Councilman Jack Tibbetts told Staff Writer Mary Callahan (“Homeless forced to keep moving,” Sunday). “Ultimately, we want to solve it. Plain and simple, we've got to put permanent supportive housing forward.”

Tibbetts is right. This discouraging cycle will continue so long as there is an acute shortage of affordable housing for working people on the bottom rungs of the income ladder; supportive and transitional housing for people who need help to overcome substance abuse or mental health issues; and shelters for the chronically homeless.

And camps are just one aspect of the problem. Homeless people sleep in downtown doorways, and they're increasingly visible in local neighborhoods.

In the county's most recent homeless census, 90 percent said they're interested in permanent housing. Catholic Charities and other local organizations placed 651 people last year alone.

But sufficient housing can't be built overnight. And between development costs, land-use planning requirements and the likelihood of neighborhood opposition, there probably won't be a lot of supportive housing built soon - even if Santa Rosa voters approve a $124 million housing bond on the Nov. 6 ballot.

The loss of 5,300 housing units in last fall's wildfires created even more competition in an already tight housing market, contributing to Sonoma County's first recorded increase in homeless since 2011. Ten months later, a growing number of local landlords are quitting a federal subsidy program for low- and moderate-income renters, leaving still more local residents searching for affordable housing. Some, no doubt, will end up homeless.

Santa Rosa Councilwoman Julie Combs, among others, says an officially sanctioned camp, with supervision, sanitation and social services could be an interim solution.

“We're talking about a regulated, safe harbor place to stay until we can find appropriate shelter and housing options,” she said.

There are good reasons to oppose homeless encampments, sanctioned or otherwise, beginning with health and safety risks.

A hepatitis A outbreak in 2017 started in San Diego's homeless population and spread as far north as Santa Cruz, killing 20 people and infecting about 600, most of them homeless. Numerous fires have originated in homeless encampments, including a December brush fire that destroyed six Los Angeles homes and damaged a dozen others.

But periodically pushing homeless people from one makeshift camp to another isn't any safer, there isn't enough room in local shelters for all of those now living in the streets, and a lawsuit in federal court aims to prevent future homeless sweeps on public property.

So maybe it's time to consider a test - a sanctioned campsite of fixed size for a fixed period of time, perhaps three to four months, with toilets and showers, trash collection, law enforcement patrols and outreach agencies present to help those seeking permanent housing.

It isn't ideal, and identifying a site won't be easy, but we haven't heard a better idea. If you have one, let us know at letters@pressdemocrat.com