Homellessness in Los Angeles
Throughout our journey in City of Angels we have explored a diverse array of topics such as gentrification, housing, parks, and the founding story of Los Angeles. The various historical articles we have read discuss the idea of ownership and how property influences someone's sense of belonging. With this in mind I took some time to reflect on how Angelenos treat the propertyless. During our visit to the Los Angeles State Historic Park we discussed homelessness and how it impacts the park system and surrounding area. The Los Angeles Times reports that over the past six years, the number of people living in the streets and shelters of the city of L.A. surged 75%- to roughly 55,000 from about 32,000. Even though homelessness impacts 55,000 people in Los Angeles, our sheltering efforts are the second worst in the United States. While visiting the park I learned that rangers enforce closing hours in order to prevent a night time homeless encampment. After our urban lab I am wondering what role wealthy people play in construction of shelters and Los Angeles's homeless problem in general. Other points of interest are what criteria influence the areas that are designated as homeless encampments and if the Not in my backyard or NIMBY mindset is hindering progress in this field.
L.A. has very evidently had a homeless problem for decades, and it’s incredibly interesting to me that they still have yet to find some sort of way to remedy it - as it clearly is getting larger and larger by the year. The issues with how people all over the world treat the homeless - from kicking them out of encampments to the infamous putting bars on park benches so that it becomes impossible for someone to sleep on them - is indicative of how much of the world thinks and what is reflected here in Los Angeles, and shows that we are always constantly trying to find some sort of artificial solution to fix problems and staying fixated on the whole NIMBY idea. If they aren’t able to sleep on the park benches in this area, they simply move to another, and if they aren’t able to set up an encampment in one area, they’ll go someplace else. I was reading some articles on the history of homelessness in L.A. and found it interesting that when it first started to become a crisis - in the 1980s - mayor Tom Bradley got FEMA trailers for many of them but City Council members objected to them being placed in their districts, and the plan eventually failed.
ReplyDeleteI understand why the wealthy and more privileged people of Los Angeles wouldn’t want homeless people staying on their doorsteps or invading their private lives, but then we need to do more about it. We can’t simply continue to kick them out of areas that they’ve all grouped at in the hopes that they’ll stay out of one particular neighborhood of L.A., but rather find ways to spring up more shelters and put more money towards services that can help them.
I think that the public response to homelessness in Los Angeles has either been to ignore it or try to move it elsewhere . In San Marino, there’s famously few sidewalks because the city wanted to discourage people, particularly homeless people, from walking around the neighborhood. Some areas ban homeless people from within their borders, and enforce this rule by picking homeless people and moving them to other neighborhoods. In idyllic suburbs or rich, insular communities, homelessness is viewed as an unsightly scar on the face of the neighborhood, which should be purged and stigmatized. On the opposite side of the spectrum, homelessness is more dense urban spaces, like downtown Los Angeles, is ignored and brushed over as an inevitable inconvenience to workers and residents of downtown. Both of these reactions fall short; in order to address homelessness, we need to not only create shelters to help people currently on the street but address the structural factors that will put more people on the street in the years to come. Addressing skyrocketing rents, development, gentrification, and even lacking mental health resources for low-income people would allow us to actually reduce the risk of homelessness for Angelenos, solving this problem in the long run. Currently, Mayor Eric Garcetti has initiated a new program to build homeless shelters and transitional housing across the city, which is a step in the right direction. But these facilities have limited capacity, and as rising housing costs push more and more people onto the street, they won't be able to accommodate LA's homeless population. We need to look to the underlying factors and fix them in order to end chronic homelessness in LA.
ReplyDeleteOne of the biggest issues facing solving the homeless crisis is NIMBYism, as many people want to solve homelessness in the abstract but are unwilling to accept that homeless shelters may be located in proximity to their homes. One of the big reasons for local pushback is because many shelters are now adopting the housing first model, where people experiencing homelessness are first given a place to stay and then supported in overcoming any substance abuse issues (which is a main cause of homelessness). The housing first model has been proven to be the most effective way to combat homelessness, but I remember listening to interviews with people living near a proposed shelter in Fullerton who were unwilling to agree to the plan if residents were allowed to have alcohol and drugs in their apartments.
ReplyDeleteGoing off of what Emma said, I did some research on homelessness in LA and found that only 25% of our homeless population is sheltered. Los Angeles's homeless population was 55,188 in 2017, only about 20,000 less than New York City's homeless population. However, despite the difference in numbers, New York is able to shelter around 95% of its homeless people, which is a major contrast to what LA is currently able to do. Additionally, I did some more research focusing in on Skid Row. I found a project called Skid Row Housing Trust, which is an organization that provides permanent supportive housing to those who have experienced homelessness, extreme poverty, poor health, addictions, and much more. In 2015, SRHT was able to provide homes to approximately 1800 individuals, and over the course of the next 5 years, they hope to develop/renovate 1200 homes. I think that if organizations like these are able to get more funding from the city, our homeless population would be significantly reduced.
ReplyDeletesome info: https://hcidla.lacity.org/prop-hhh
ReplyDeleteheres a podcast i half-listened to (it was really long): https://soundcloud.com/user-197456644/tackling-homelessness-in-la-county
I am not super versed in the topic of homelessness in LA, so I did a little bit of research on the measures LA is taking to reduce homelessness and found some interesting information. Prop HHH and Measure H were passed fairly recently by county voters to set aside around $1.2 billion for permanent housing, and of that $1.2 billion, over a hundred thousand is dedicated to supportive facilities like shelters. I think it's interesting what everyone is talking about– NIMBYsm– the whole idea that we all want to solve a problem, just not in our neighborhood where it can impact our own lives at all. I think the fact that so many people voted yes on a property tax that will fund housing and homeless shelters is definitely a victory for Los Angles– but what comes next? Many homeless people suffer from mental health issues, many are uneducated, many are without employment or employment training, and many are substance abusers. Where does the assistance in helping with addictions or mental illnesses or finding jobs come from? I think it's important to acknowledge that yes, we have come a long way, but I still think we still have a long way to go.
This blogpost made me think of a lot of things that I don't really know how to put together into one answer (so I didn't lol)
ReplyDeleteThis blogpost reminded me of the first blogpost we did ("Sea of Associated Causes"). Homelessness in LA, I think, is one major issue that falls into this idea of a "sea of associated causes" which also encompasses rising rent & the housing shortage, developers & gentrification, policing and healthcare in LA, etc. I don't really think there is one way to tackle the issue because there isn't one root cause of it.
Also, this post made me think about what (if at all) are the boundaries of homelessness in LA. For a long time I've heard about Skid Row being the epicenter of LA's homeless problem and I'm not really sure if this is true anymore. But I do think it's interesting how Skid Row was the designated homeless area in LA at some point, and that it became known for that, and I'm curious as to how that idea changed (or didn't)/ how Skid Row expanded/moved. Also how public places- like libraries, parks, beaches, play a role in this.
Lastly, I think it's really interesting in how LA is this liberal, progressive city but at the same time we have this massive homeless problem that isn't really being thought about/acted upon by the average person living in LA. We have all these marches downtown for various national issues, but then people aren't really showing up when it's about something happening in our city. How can we be this progressive city when theres a massive human rights issue happening right here??
Emma brought up a good point about how people in the long run want to help those who need housing and shelter but only if it isn't near their homes. It's unfortunate that this concept of "helping but not at one's own cost" is consistent in the topic of helping the homeless. What do the wealthier demographic of people do to solve this dilemma? I'm not exactly sure. But I will bring up DTLA again. People paying expensive rent for nice apartments and lofts while homeless people in tents are lined up down the street in an alley. In this case, the homeless issue is literally in their backyard and I think that is is concerning that the rich people of DTLA do nothing about it. They continue throughout their day, most likely passing by the homeless on a day to day basis completely ignoring them. I feel like if no one recognizes the problem then the issue will persist and not be properly solved.
ReplyDeleteI am curious to know whether or not the Broad, Geffen, Musk, Soon-Shiong (etc.) estates or foundations have been contacted or inquired to invest money in an initiative to eradicate homelessness in LA. They are some of the wealthiest names in Los Angeles and I would be interested to hear their perspective on the issue.
I agree with what many people have said above regarding NIMBYism and how it plays such a large role in the homelessness crisis in Los Angeles. This post reminds me a lot of an organization my dad and I volunteer at on some weekends named Family Promise. Although it is not a shelter, it is a house located in the South Central area where homeless families can come to do a multitude of things; they are able to wash their clothes, wash their dishes (any sippy cups or containers their children eat out of), there are toys for the kids to play with, there are beds to take naps in, and computers to help the parents find jobs. When my dad and I volunteered, we would either play with the kids or help the parents use the computers to find job options. I found it interesting that the house my dad and I visited from time to time was in an area of a lower income. Since then, I have seen that there are more Family Promise houses in different areas, but when they first started the non-profit it was in a poorer area of LA. It all comes back to the idea of NIMBYism, we want to help the homeless crisis in our area, however, we don't want it to attract the homeless near our houses or the cafes we eat at.
ReplyDeleteAdding to Charlotte's post, I think that we have taken a step in the right direction, however, it is just one step. I find it interesting that people want to help as long as it does not affect them; it's interesting that when we as people do some good we tend to stop there even if the problem is not resolved. I don't know if that made complete sense but I hope it did.
Recently, as I was driving to school, NPR was doing a segment (mentioned by Emma) on the potential 60-unit permanent supportive housing complex (not a shelter!) that a homeless aid organization was fighting to have built in Fullerton, a city in Orange County that is about 45 minutes from Pasadena. Upon re-researching the plan, I found that the nonprofit, Pathways of Hope, had temporarily withdrawn the proposal (which I must’ve missed in what I initially heard about it), citing the November election, the potential for more state grant funding, and federal lawsuits that may supposedly help push cities to build shelters to cut down on people sleeping on public property. Executive Director David Gillanders plans to reintroduce a similar proposal early next year, potentially with changes to the location or site details. But the embattled, recently postponed/cancelled plan was already going to be on city-owned property in an area not bordered by housing. It wasn’t completely removed from the community of Fullerton, but that’s because the future residents would need access to community services as many of the residents chosen would be selected because of chronic homelessness, which is often due to mental or physical disabilities. Permanent supportive housing has been proven to be the best way to get people off of the streets. So why is there so much backlash from the community?
ReplyDeletePhilip Bromley, one of the leaders of the opposition, says it’s because the proposed site is too close to a local elementary school– but he has a different site all picked out in the city’s industrial area. Naina Parker and Stephanie Bromley worry that the complex will attract even more homeless people, who will further damage Fullerton’s “scenic trails” by pitching tents and leaving trash and also become Fullerton’s responsibility. Other residents have threatened to sue Gillanders if he continues to push the project because of safety concerns. Here’s one quote from either Parker or Stephanie Bromley that especially stood out to me: “We spent a lot of money to buy homes and to get our kids to school and you know, just to live the American Dream, and we feel like our safety and our wellbeing is being compromised and no one is thinking about us.”
Of course, it’s easy for us to judge these residents of Fullerton when the complex is not being proposed in our own backyards; the problem here might very well be human nature and the difficulty we have in seeing past ourselves.
link to some of the KPCC interviews regarding the potential Fullerton housing complex: https://www.scpr.org/news/2018/10/08/86585/nimby-or-not-would-you-house-the-homeless-in-your/
Like Rachel, Kevin's blogpost reminded me of the first blog post having to do with gentrification. I definitely think that this ties back to people in power (wealthy and white people) pushing out others. This is evident in wealthier neighborhoods like Pasadena or San Marino where there are fewer homeless people than in places like downtown. Yesterday, I was on my way to the Griffith observatory and as I was driving, I saw a bunch tents on the dirt hills beside the freeways. It is quite saddening to see these people being pushed out to the point that the only place they have to go is the freeway where they face danger and terrible living conditions. I think it would be interesting to discuss the various places that homeless people are "pushed" into after they are pushed out.
ReplyDeleteI also took a look at the various demographics of homelessness in LA and found that the homeless population is 34% Black/African American and 33% Hispanic/Latino. Additionally, 27% of the homeless population is faced with a serious mental illness. I am curious as to how various demographics ended up homeless (did the lose their jobs? were they being abused? was the rent to high?) and what we can do as a community to get to the root cause. Here is the link to the page I was looking at if you would like to see more demographics on homelessness in LA.
http://www.laalmanac.com/social/so14.php
Over the summer I met the field deputy of the Highland Park and Mount Washington areas. He explained to me that he had been involved in mitigating issues surrounding homelessness and affordable housing developments in his respective neighborhoods: on the basis of gentrification and subsequent rent increase, residents were resisting the construction of a new affordable housing development. In actuality, the development was supposedly intended to house homeless people and not wealthy newcomers. This makes me think that many people are unaware of the true intentions behind certain development projects???
ReplyDeleteI would also like to know more about the legality of homeless encampments: where are they allowed? How is it that in certain areas (like Skid Row) encampments are generally left alone, whereas in others they're broken up? I know that over the summer a law allowing Angelenos to sleep in their cars expired - I should check up on this.
When visiting the Los Angeles State Historic Park, I drew similarities between the park and Southern-Californian beaches. Venice beach is an artsy pocket of Los Angeles where rent and housing prices have dramatically increased. Despite the rapid gentrification of this area, it is also home to an ever-growing homeless community targeted and criminalized by the police. Why do we pour money into these spaces and not help the people surrounding them? Hearing about the creation of the Los Angeles State Historic Park and the amount of money needed to fund the project was overwhelming. I started to think about how many shelters and public schools we could have created using their resources. I absolutely see the importance to keep and maintain these green spaces, but the beauty of the landscape is marred by the alternate possibilities and neighboring poverty.
ReplyDeleteLike Lux said, homelessness isn’t anything new in Los Angeles. Homelessness is a complicated issue that cannot easily be solved. I do think LA’s homelessness issue is a major consequence of gentrification. According to the Los Angeles Times, “California is experiencing a severe housing shortage.” This is due to gentrification which is taking away affordable housing units. Additionally, affordable housing units are also more difficult to build because of “restrictive zoning laws along with high construction costs and anti-development sentiment.” UCLA law professor Gary Blasi noted, “In America, housing is a commodity. If you can afford it, you have it; if you can’t, you don’t.” This housing reality, not only in Los Angeles, but in the United States is pretty sad. I don’t think it’s mainly the wealthy population’s fault; however, I do think many people worsen the issue by refusing to allow homeless shelters to be built in their area.
ReplyDeleteWhile walking around the park we visited on our urban lab, I couldn't help but compare it to the parks I have grown up in (Griffith Park and Sunland Park) which are very different from each other. I noticed how nice the Los Angeles State Historic Park is and how you could always find one of the park's staff nearby which is the complete opposite from the parks I know. What stuck out to me was when Mr. Woods explained that they closed the bathrooms because people were using hypodermic needles and then passing out leaving the door locked for hours which is the same thing that happens to the park I live near. What caught my attention was that they were actually fixing the problem which is not what is going to happen to the park I lived near. The park I live near has the same problem with people using drugs or prostituting themselves and locking the door for hours; it's gotten to the point where people just go to the bathroom on the outside of the building.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the major problems causing people to become or remain homeless. I have seen how drugs can affect and change a person. There is also the stereotype that every homeless person is an addict of some sort which causes people to hesitate them from getting help. Also, like Rachel, I don't believe there is one root cause for homelessness in Los Angeles, let alone America, there are so many problems a person can face whether it be battling an addiction, unemployment, gentrification, etc..
Although LA's sheltering efforts are the second worst in the US, Pasadena is doing their part to help the problem. Pasadena Partnership is a committee that works together to prevent homelessness in Pasadena, and there has actually been a 56% decrease in homelessness since 2011 specifically in Pasadena. On the other hand, I think wealthy people play a large role in the construction of shelters, and I know that I rarely see the homeless around the elite class residential areas. People who live in pricey areas usually have a gated entrance that separates them from the road, but opens up to a neighborhood for those who can afford secluded and large houses. Therefore, automatically, there is no way for any interaction between the rich and the homeless to occur. Moreover, if the homeless are caught residing near these neighborhoods, they are probably kicked out by gate security. This NIMBY mindset is definitely driven by these neighborhoods as they probably pay extra for security to make sure their private streets are not housing the homeless.
ReplyDeleteI think a solution to homelessness is a more complex issue than just building facilities and programs. I'm sure the majority of the Los Angeles population is aware of this issue; however, many are uncomfortable with the homeless living near their homes. NIMBYism is not new to Angelenos; in fact, since the creation of the city, white settlers used this belief to systematically segregate communities from one another in a means to create a socioeconomic divide. Since then, more impoverished communities in Los Angeles have experienced countless instances of environmental and social injustice (i.e., Freeways). Therefore, it is evident why there has been so much pushback from wealthy communities regarding living spaces for the homeless. Los Angeles was built NIMBYism, and it is going to take many more years before the wealthy begin to reform their archaic beliefs surrounding the homeless.
ReplyDelete-My Publish button wasn't there :(
Sorry for being late regardless!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete