I’ve heard different interpretations of this language. Obviously the major cities don’t want this at all bc it’s a poor allocation of resources that goes against evidence of the last 30-40 years. OTOH I’ve heard it’s language that forces smaller jurisdictions that do next to
-
-
While no program should be created to shift dollars away from PSH to shelter, there has to be a better way for the state to incent/compel cities to offer more beds.
-
Yes, you are supporting a requirement for cities to provide refuge for people in need. That is different, and can be entirely separate, from the most chilling and unhelpful part of the proposal, which is to force people to live in shelters whether or not they want to go there.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
we could imagine, for example, a CA law declaring that during a state of housing emergency as now, all local govts must adopt their own or accept state-set programs of permitted, managed, legal vehicle dwelling and safe parking facilities with capacity of city's last PIT count.
-
basically everywhere in state has much more free public parking than unhoused residents, localities can decriminalize vehicle dwelling and expand their parking programs to include
#parkingdwellingpermit programs, and plenty of groups are ready to supply low cost mobile homes.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.