4 ms·

> It’s not about building more housing. It actually is. From: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/06/08/1003982733/squalor-behind-the-golden-gate-confronti

by pm90 5y ago

> It’s not about building more housing. It actually is. From: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/06/08/1003982733/squalor-behind-the-golden-gate-confronting-californias-homelessness-crisis https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/06/08/1003982733/squ... > By the 1980s, homelessness emerged as a chronic issue. There were many factors, including the federal government deciding to slash the budget for affordable housing. By then the California state government had significantly cut taxes and gutted social programs, including for state-funded mental institutions, resulting in thousands of people with mental illnesses and other difficulties struggling to make it on their own. > Yet the core reason for the crisis boils down to supply and demand for housing. As regions like the San Francisco Bay Area became magnets for highly paid professionals in the computer-driven economy, they failed to build enough new units to keep up with demand. > A 2016 study by McKinsey Global Institute estimated that California needs 3.5 million new housing units by 2025 to deal with its chronic housing shortage. Yet new housing construction has only slowed since then, despite Gov. Gavin Newsom's campaign promise to lead an effort to produce those 3.5 million units. Even before the pandemic wrought havoc on the construction business, California was constructing only about 100,000 new homes per year, way below the minimum 180,000 per year that analysts say the state desperately needs.

wahern 5y ago
> Gov. Gavin Newsom's campaign promise to lead an effort to produce those 3.5 million units. He is leading an effort. Whether he's spending enough of his own political capital is another question. But one of the problems in California is that the state constitution guarantees municipalities "home rule". That means very little can be accomplished without local cooperation, including local zoning board cooperation. It's like federalism at the state level--the central government can ban practices relatively easily, but it can't force positive action, only coerce through tax revenue incentives, which has its own constitutional restrictions, not to mention political barriers. California is a NIMBY paradise, legally speaking.
- cheriot 5y ago
  > California is a NIMBY paradise, legally speaking. 100% However the state has and can overrule cities. First ADUs were legalized and next, if SB9 passes, duplexes. It's baby steps, but it's possible and probably the only way forward.
babesh 5y ago
In California, it initially was because Reagan closed mental institutions. We had the housing (the mental institutions). Also, housing back then was affordable. You can’t chalk it down to housing till close to the 2000s. Now you have this toxic brew of people with mental issues, drug addicts, people with family issues, and economic issues all feeding into each other. Housing is then only a start. Also, any city that gives homeless more services than other areas just attracts more homeless. It is monstrously expensive. Look at what SF is spending and watch what happens when the COVID-19 funds and state IPO windfall run dry. Both the left and the right are at fault. Some of these people need to be institutionalized. Cities need to be cleaned up. Housing should be provided. Shipping homeless to other cities is not cool. No city is probably willing to pay what it truly costs. It is probably roughly how much we pay for the criminal justice system. https://nicic.gov/assign-library-item-package-accordion/statistics-statistics-criminal-justice-system-costs https://nicic.gov/assign-library-item-package-accordion/stat... $146K per person for the criminal justice system and then multiply it by 2 or 3 for social services, mental health services, drug treatment, etc… Roughly 250 billion a year. You need to make the underlying institutions more efficient but institutional capture has already occurred. In other words, in a few years it is more likely to be 500 billion a year and the problem would be just as bad. Of course if you wanted to turn around the criminal justice system as well, then you immediately jump into the trillions.

by pm90 5y ago

wahern 5y ago

> Gov. Gavin Newsom's campaign promise to lead an effort to produce those 3.5 million units. He is leading an effort. Whether he's spending enough of his own political capital is another question. But one of the problems in California is that the state constitution guarantees municipalities "home rule". That means very little can be accomplished without local cooperation, including local zoning board cooperation. It's like federalism at the state level--the central government can ban practices relatively easily, but it can't force positive action, only coerce through tax revenue incentives, which has its own constitutional restrictions, not to mention political barriers. California is a NIMBY paradise, legally speaking.

cheriot 5y ago
> California is a NIMBY paradise, legally speaking. 100% However the state has and can overrule cities. First ADUs were legalized and next, if SB9 passes, duplexes. It's baby steps, but it's possible and probably the only way forward.

babesh 5y ago

In California, it initially was because Reagan closed mental institutions. We had the housing (the mental institutions). Also, housing back then was affordable. You can’t chalk it down to housing till close to the 2000s. Now you have this toxic brew of people with mental issues, drug addicts, people with family issues, and economic issues all feeding into each other. Housing is then only a start. Also, any city that gives homeless more services than other areas just attracts more homeless. It is monstrously expensive. Look at what SF is spending and watch what happens when the COVID-19 funds and state IPO windfall run dry. Both the left and the right are at fault. Some of these people need to be institutionalized. Cities need to be cleaned up. Housing should be provided. Shipping homeless to other cities is not cool. No city is probably willing to pay what it truly costs. It is probably roughly how much we pay for the criminal justice system. https://nicic.gov/assign-library-item-package-accordion/statistics-statistics-criminal-justice-system-costs https://nicic.gov/assign-library-item-package-accordion/stat... $146K per person for the criminal justice system and then multiply it by 2 or 3 for social services, mental health services, drug treatment, etc… Roughly 250 billion a year. You need to make the underlying institutions more efficient but institutional capture has already occurred. In other words, in a few years it is more likely to be 500 billion a year and the problem would be just as bad. Of course if you wanted to turn around the criminal justice system as well, then you immediately jump into the trillions.