After last weeks class, I cannot stop thinking about whether shelters and agencies are actually helping the homelessness issue at hand or if we are only “beautifying” these issues. At first, I thought tiny houses were a great way to help create affordable housing while also reducing human footprint on the planet, but after consideration, the idea of beautifying these issues to fit public standards starting setting in my mind. Are tiny houses such a great option because it distracts the public eye from visually seeing tents or homeless camps on the streets? The idea of tiny houses was to create radically smaller homes dedicated to simplicity for affordable housing opportunities. The outside of the house can appear to fit the standards of typical housing, but the inside is not comfortable or can even fit the normal necessities by humans.

Tiny houses are what made me begin thinking about the idea of beautifying  homelessness. And I realized, NIMBY (not in my backyard) is such an issue that help for the homeless population is almost never intact without attempting to beautify the issue. Individualistic Americans are so concerned with the appearance of their living state, that beautifying the homeless population might actually help in achieving neighboring support. I don’t believe in beautifying the homeless community, but if the idea of beautifying can actually achieve more support (in some areas) then maybe its not such a bad thing. This idea of building tiny houses,  attempts to normalize the homelessness issue. I believe tiny houses, in some way, are a good idea but I disagree along the lines of such small houses/living spaces where the resident cannot live comfortably. If tiny houses are used to support the unhoused community, then the living spaces should include a normal and healthy living area.

Since this class started, I have become hyper-aware of all the homeless encampments I see when I’m driving in the area. Before this class, I’m not sure if I would have seen the tents hidden in the Santa Ana Wash or noticed the shelter-like structures off the 210 heading toward San Bernardino. I think this is a positive part of taking this class because it’s forcing me to actually see the homeless people in our area. The “out of sight, out of mind” attitude isn’t easy to hold when a daily commute involves recognizing certain homeless people/ popular homeless “areas”. Even this past Saturday I took a trip out to Venice and felt like I was seeing homeless people left and right. It triggered an interesting conversation with the friend I was with as we started talking about the different approaches to solving the homelessness problem. Her view on homelessness was very victim-centered and she had a worry about enabling the homeless by offering services. I encouraged her to think of the countless people who are homeless due to external factors, like job loss, and used our close friend as an example to show her how easy it would be to become homeless in L.A. Even though we disagreed on the fundamental contributions to homelessness, we were still able to have a conversation about it and could hear each other out. Even on our way back to Redlands, she pointed out several tents under freeway passes and acknowledged that whoever was living there definitely was in need of some help.

It’s so important to be aware of the problems around us that don’t affect us directly! We can all lend a hand and do something to help.

As we reach the end of our semester I am glad to say that I have learned a lot in this course. I would like to think of myself as an open and “progressive” person, but I no doubt held, and perhaps still hold, problematic views about homelessness in the United States of America. One such view is the idea that people are homeless through individual action more than structural consequences. Rising housing prices are a substantial factor in contemporary homelessness, but it is also important to acknowledge the structure of social welfare policy. There are not large programs or sources of funding to provided housing to the marginally housed. America’s criminalizes drug use and addiction rather than treating those issues as a public health epidemic. Medicaid is extremely difficult to get into, and, depending on your state, structurally deficient.

Additionally, I considered many to be on the street because of a mental illness. Upon examination, I’ve found reality to be more nuanced. Many on the street are mentally ill, and find it difficult to reenter society because of that disability. However, mental illness is a natural consequence of living on the street; the conditions inspire disability much more than the conditions are inspired by it. Reintegration is an important aspect of homelessness we have not touched on much.

I do have a few spots that I wish we could have covered more of. I wish this class had a more international perspective because I think a cross analysis of homelessness in other developed societies would provide substantial insight into American homelessness. Also, I wish we could have studied more about social services and policy targeted to economically marginalized communities.

This weekend I was in the Dana Point/Laguna Niguel area with my family celebrating Easter, and I got to thinking about the article we read and discussed earlier this week on the homeless populations being pushed out of Orange County. As I was driving around, I saw endless gated neighborhoods, high end grocery stores, and public parks- clearly all at the disposal of pretty wealthy families. Especially since the article mentioned Laguna Niguel, our discussions on NIMBY really began to make sense. Trying to put myself in their shoes, I thought about how beautiful the neighborhoods were and how different they would look with homeless encampments in a few locations. But then I began to think about all we have learned this semester: about how these homeless individuals are rarely dangerous, how people can be so misunderstanding of their position, and how there are so few resources offered. Perhaps the people of Laguna Niguel are afraid of homeless camps being near their children’s schools, but it sure seems like more progress could be made on the issue if people would use all their effort usually put towards complaining towards finding affordable housing in their communities instead. I think that people tend to forget that the homeless individuals they observe and come into contact with are fellow community members rather than strangers they have nothing in common with.

Introduced by Senator Wiener, SB 827 is a new bill that would allow for “upzoning,” that is, building heights above the limit that local governments have approved and densities currently restricted by city zoning codes near public transit stops by limiting local control of high density housing developments near transit-oriented developments (TODs for short). For those of you who don’t know, TODs are pretty popular these days and are part of the New Urbanism movement, which stresses walkability, variety when it comes to housing types, and mixed-use development. Proponents of SB 827 say that it would be one way to start satiating housing demands that are only going to continue growing, but many groups and organizations (some of seemingly separate causes) came out the woodwork in opposition to the bill. Opposition is based in concerns that said “upzoning” would not necessarily entail more affordable housing but perhaps just more luxury condos, the idea that it would “strip local governments from the decision-making process” (Kash), and the fact that 96% of San Francisco would be eligible for the new drastic change in height allowances.
I have not thought of how debates concerning local vs. state control could pertain to housing other than when they relate to NIMBYism, and I’m not sure what I think of this bill. I am definitely all for streamlining the affordable housing development process, but I also don’t think San Francisco should have to lose its character by turning into one monolith of 8-story apartment complexes. Have any of you heard about this bill? It seems complicated and I’d like to hear y’all opinions.

Oh, my in-text citation is from a Sierra Club statement on SB 827. The link to the statement is here: https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/02/sierra-club-policy-transit-oriented-development

This week was very interesting. I enjoyed going over the data exercise  4 on the different organizations and their effectiveness. I chose a organization based out of New York. They try to feed around a thousand meals in the city on a given night. The organization also had many different housing options. They offer housing for single mothers and their children, a place for people that just got out of jail, a place for men, and apartments for families. The apartments they ask you to pay a small fee and go to some classes. I think the class is a great idea because they are about saving and investments. They also are about staying clean and out of trouble. Overall this program does great things and continues to help others find housing, shelter, and food. I found that hearing all of these different organizations working together really made me appreciate what the world is doing to try to help homeless or near homeless. It was amazing to hear that other countries are doing outreach. In Austria they are doing outreach through food. They help by serving food on any given day and the locals who really wanted It were extremely appreciative while the nonlocal were very greedy and only wanted what they wanted.

During class on Monday March 26^th, I presented my Book “B” presentation on the book “Tent City Urbanism: From Self-Organized Camps to Tiny House Villages” by Andrew Heben. This book was very unique compared to the other presentations. It introduced the tent cities and tiny houses organized by the homeless that presents a sustainable housing options and can also improve quality of life. The class and I shared an interesting discussion about this movement and its possibilities. After the presentation, I was wondering why the author did not include more information about children and their point of view living in the tents or tiny houses. He did mention that the children thought of it as “camping” and were unaware of their serious situation.

This inspired me to research more about children living in tents or tiny houses. In the article, “Everyone agrees: The Santa Ana River trail is no place to raise homeless children,” by Theresa Walker, tells the story of a mother and her children living in a shady homeless encampment located along the Santa Ana River bed. Many parents come to the river when they have no alternatives. They hide their children from Child Protective Service for fear that they might be taken away. Even though this may be an alternative, everyone in this camp believed it is no place for a child. The conditions were described as unsafe and dirty. In some instances, the mother and 11 year old daughter found syringes and needles. The daughter described it saying “I loved it here. I knew everybody, but the struggle was real.” I recognize how serious this problem is that families want to stay together, but living in this situation could be extremely unsafe for children.

https://www.ocregister.com/2017/05/16/santa-ana-river-trail-is-no-place-to-raise-children/

The perspectives of the homeless community is something that I have worked on to understand this semester.  In a recent article published in the New York Times, Benjamin Weiser provides a perspective of a homeless women Nakesha Williams.  Nakesha would reject when people would offer help like entering a shelter.  Nakesha would accept any food, clothes, or toiletries that was offered.  No one who knew Nakesha would have anticipated that she would become a member of the homeless community.  She was Class President, Choir singer, member of the school newspaper and National Honor Society.   She even was third in her class and received her college tuition covered by a scholarship.  Nakesha faced challenges in her life that led her to wind up where she did.  Her mother became ill with cancer.  This led her to a number of odd jobs that left her moving a lot.  Through this, she developed a sense of anxiety.  Well in Los Angeles she would find places that offered free samples to eat and go to Churches that offered services.  Throughout her life, she never once referred to herself as homeless.  In New York, she was a regular member of the homeless community that resided on the streets.  She developed a relationship with members of the community that would stop and ask if she needed any help.  Weiser comments on the fact that are 3,900 unsheltered homeless people in New York City. They reside in sleeping bags near building/construction sites, bury themselves in blankets, ponchos and cardboard boxes. You never know anyone’s story until you take the time to talk to someone.  It is important to remember to never make assumptions about a member of the homeless community.

This week in class we had a presentation on tiny homes and whether or not they could be a solution towards homelessness. There are pros and cons towards tiny home villages and whether or not they would be beneficial to society let alone the homeless. Something to consider is whether or not it is a good idea to put the homeless population all in the same area or to spread them out. This is not an answer that can be answered immediately because again, we have to look at the pros and cons. Having them all together could make things easier for the community itself, but may not be beneficial to the homeless population. However, having them dispersed all over a city may make it difficult to regulate them and have an idea of where they may. Tiny homes I believe are a good option for homeless because it provides a better shelter then sleeping on the park bench. However, my initial thought when I think of tiny homes is all the TV shows that are made about the rich wanting tiny homes.  The rich are  saying they want to “downsize,” but then spend an abundance of money on trying to make it the fanciest “tiny home” someone has ever seen. I personally believe that tiny homes are nothing but a trend that people have recently discovered. If one simply Google’s “tiny homes” and clicks on images the “TINY” homes that come up are absurd. They are beautiful and a generally interesting idea (one I could never live in though), but one could easily tell that they have a lot of money put into them. I recognize that building tiny home communities for the homeless population would not have such elaborate homes because they would have such a smaller budget, but then I also feel that the rich would no longer be interested in them. I don’t say that in a bad or a good way, I just believe it is the truth because then the rich would not think they have something “unique.”

This week, we discussed different homeless organizations and what they were doing to help, and what made them unique from other organizations. I remember one of us shared on the Coalition for the Homeless, which is an advocacy group. They focused on the right to have a home and specifically the right to vote, which is not a main concern we see in many organizations. One unique thing I found about them is they have a mobile soup kitchen that travels to 35 different sites. I feel this is very beneficial to help combat homelessness on a wider scale. I shared about Solid Ground, an organization in Seattle who’s primary fight is against racism. They believe institutional racism leads to homelessness (more commonly for people of color) and they bring awareness to that issue. They also offer varieties of shelter, donate food and refer banks to get food, and prioritize credit counseling. Believing that racism is the root of homelessness is an idea I had not previously heard, so I appreciate that different perspective. Lastly, an organization in Austria was discussed, but this one did not seem ideal. Austrians could get free food, but foreigners could not. The races were also divided when dining. The homeless were not appreciative of the food they were getting, and demanded something more appetizing. I fully support helping those in need, but I also believe you need to be appreciative of what you are getting. If someone is willing to help you, offer thanks instead of rudeness. It makes me wonder how homeless generally behave in other countries.

What kind of behavioral experiences have you guys had with homeless you have encountered? Do you feel it is justified to not be very pleasant when you are in a situation such as homelessness, such as those in the Austrian shelter?