Quote:
Originally Posted by pip
The original post was very misleading. The same topic was discussed here
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=234635
Of the current budget 2/3 the money goes to people that aren't homeless. It goes to prevention - rental subsidies, eviction prevention and permanent supportive housing. Its a very expensive city and someone has to work the low wage jobs.
|
It all goes to programs we wouldn't have or need without the "homeless problem". And it's not me calling it part of the city's homeless budget--every discussion of the subject in and out of the media does, mainly for the reason I just stated.
Quote:
Also on any given night there is about 7 or 8 thousand homeless people but there are also lots of people that are temporarily homeless. Over the course of a year there will be 20,000 different people that experience homelessness in SF.
|
That's sort of true. Again, every discussion of the subject makes a distinction between the short term and chronically homeless. But the costs related to the short term homeless are minimal--most of these people solve their own problem, either by finding a job, housing they can afford or moving away. It's the people living on the street who've been homeless for years that cost all the money and constitute the problem.
Quote:
Of the new tax increase 50% will go towards new housing for the near homeless and working poor, 25% would serve the severely mentally ill. Of the people on the street 10% would go to adding more shelters and Navigation Centers. 70% of the homeless in SF used to have private housing that is no longer affordable.
|
Almost everybody, at some point, "used to have private housing". You're implying there are hordes of people in SF who get evicted because they can't pay their rent--this in a city with some of the most protective laws in favor of renters in the country--and stay in SF, living on the street. There's no evidence for that and you can effectively live in a place for years without paying rent before you can actually get tossed out (physically evicted). Start by claiming some kind of disability.
As for where the money will be spent, love to see a reference because I'm having trouble recognizing the difference between "housing for the near homeless" and the "affordable housing" which is a separate program, heavily subsidized by a different budget (largely paid for by requirements placed on market rate developers). And services for the mentally ill are part of the Dept. of Public Health budget though, of course, they can fatten that up even more with some of the Prop. C money, especially if the services are provided in transitional housing.