This post is a followup to Why is Houston More Successful at Tackling Homelessness than San Francisco? Part I: The Numbers, Why is Houston More Successful at Tackling Homelessness than San Francisco? Part II, and A Tale of Governance and Politics: Homelessness Trends in Texas and California. I’ll begin with a brief recap, followed by excerpts from an editorial in today’s San Francisco Chronicle.
First, a comparison of Houston and San Francisco:
Well that’s depressing. Why is San Francisco doing so poorly in its fight against homelessness? Per Why is Houston More Successful at Tackling Homelessness than San Francisco? Part II:
Lots of reasons, including politics, legal challenges, and poor city oversight of nonprofits…But the biggest reason homelessness continues to be such a huge problem in San Francisco is its lack of cheap housing. And by “cheap”, I mean low-enough rent to be affordable for someone with the income-equivalent of $1700 a month in take-home pay and/or cash and non-cash government benefits, e.g., Supplementary Security Income (SSI), SNAP benefits (“food stamps”), Medicare, and housing vouchers. Ideally, rent would not exceed $800 a month.
Unfortunately, finding a cheap place to live in San Francisco is a near-impossibility. For example, I found no rental listings under $800/month during a recent Zillow search and just six listing under $1000/month (5 of which were teeny studios). Even if San Francisco’s homeless programs were as efficient and well-run as the programs in Houston, San Francisco would still struggle to house its homeless population.
But it’s been hard to find cheap housing in San Francisco for decades. That includes 2011 and 2012, when SF had a much lower homeless population than Houston. What accounts for Houston’s relative success in tackling homelessness? Per A Tale of Governance and Politics: Homelessness Trends in Texas and California…
One thing Houston is doing right is finding permanent supportive housing for its homeless population, with over 16,000 housed since 2011. Another is using a carrot-and-stick approach, such as prosecuting homeless individuals for low-level misdemeanors and sending them to a “Homeless Court”, which allows people experiencing homelessness to meet traditional sentence requirements by participating in service program activities such as chemical dependency meetings, computer literacy classes, and job skills training. Houston also coordinates homeless services with nearby cities and counties that are part of the same Continuum of Care administrative unit. This governance structure fosters collaborative problem-solving across a diverse political landscape, inculcating a culture that respects both progressive and conservative sensibilities. In other words, help the homeless but don’t ignore the impact of homelessness on businesses, neighborhoods, and crime rates.
To simplify a bit, San Francisco’s unending problem with homelessness boils down to bad governance and toxic politics. Lack of cheap housing plays a role of course, but I’m downgrading its importance after reading today’s editorial in today’s San Francisco Chronicle. To quote:
“One year ago, a damning investigation uncovered that 888 units of S.F’s permanent supportive housing were sitting empty. Those numbers have gotten worse…A year ago, when the average time between being approved for housing and handed keys was 85 days, the city said it was aiming to cut the time to 30 to 45 days. But last week, when asked what progress they’d made, officials disclosed that wait times had actually gone up. In fact, they’ve more than doubled. It now takes an average of five months, or around 150 days, to move someone experiencing homelessness into a home.
That’s a shameful length of time for a program allotted $356 million each year. At the very least, the city should do an in-depth audit of its permanent supportive housing program to diagnose exactly where the process is collapsing. And then, it should do everything in its power to get hundreds of people off the street as quickly as possible.
Anything less is an embarrassment.”
I second that emotion.