4 ms·

Los Angeles may force hotels to house the homeless

12 points by crhulls 4y ago

bikingbismuth 4y ago
If this gets passed in 2024, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. There are probably a lot of homeless people who could benefit from this and wouldn’t cause issues for the hotels. On the other hand, there is also a portion of the population that will harass guests, wreck rooms, and cause other problems. I wonder what the vetting process on who gets room through this initiative looks like.
politelemon 4y ago
I am not from the US. I have vaguely heard that many large cities have homelessness issue. But, I am guessing that the homelessness problem must be pretty severe for the council to consider such a measure? It doesn't look like it's happening yet: > After a day of hearings, the Council, perhaps swayed by a huge hotel industry turnout, voted down the initiative. But the Council then voted 12-0 to put the initiative, which had 126,000 signatures, on the ballot for March 2024. Is this ballot aimed at voters, or is it a ballot aimed at city council members? And pardon my cynicism but that's really far away, it's enough time for the hotel industry mentioned above to sway the people involved to vote against it, no?
bergenty 4y ago
gamblor956 4y ago
LA has a voluntary version of this, Project Roomkey, which launched during COVID. It is still ongoing, but almost all of the hotels participating have withdrawn from the program. Every participating hotel reported substantially above-average damage to hotel property (meaning, above the normal damage caused by non-homeless hotel guests), most participating hotels reported bed bug infestations that cost tens of thousands to eliminate. That doesn't include the dozens of suicides, murders, and rapes that took place at participating hotels. TLDR: it turns out that housing isn't actually the solution to homelessness, because for most of LA's homeless, homelessness is just a symptom of untreated mental illness or uncontrolled drug use.
- captainzidgel 4y ago
  If housing isn't the solution to homelessness, what is? Telling drug addicts to get clean before they get a home? I'm sure it's really easy for people with drug addictions and mental illnesses to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and conquer those while sleeping out in the cold, especially in Skid Row where you're living around 6 drug dealers. Housing comes first, social work should follow. If the government doesn't absorb the costs of property damage when housing the homeless, they're going to absorb the costs of policing the homeless on the street. I will admit it was inconsiderate of the homeless to take bed bugs with them to the hotels. They should have just chosen to not get bed bugs when sleeping in blankets they pulled out of garbage bins.
  - gamblor956 4y ago
    Forced hospitalization is the only proven way of dealing with severe mental illness and drug addiction. Stable independent living only matters once a person is sober and sane enough to use it.
  - Teever 4y ago
    So how many people have you taken in lately?
  - primax 4y ago
    Given the circumstances, it's viable for treatment to come before housing. The reason we don't house the homeless is a percentage of them destroy whatever is given to them. So, use the treatment process to get them well first.
    - captainzidgel 4y ago
      I may have been too snarky in my original response but my point is this: treatment before housing implies treatment on the street, which I cannot believe is productive. I don't care what meds you take for your schizophrenia, sleeping on the streets is a form of mental assault in itself. If you're trying to beat a drug addiction, the people surrounding you are going to work to undo everything your support groups and methadone clinics are doing for you. America is obsessed with homeless people proving themselves "worthy" before getting public assistance and it isn't working. Finland has actually been solving homelessness by providing homes first, treatment second. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle-helsinkis-radical-solution-to-homelessness https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle...
djohnston 4y ago
Lead the way California XD, we will continue watching with morbid fascination.
nso95 4y ago
Well I guess they'll see many hotels decide to close
- truffdog 4y ago
  And then people will complain about all the AirBnB rentals everywhere...
anm89 4y ago
Not going to lie. I get a lot of schadenfreude out of watching California repeatedly footgun itself.
- hollywood_court 4y ago
  As an Alabamian, I am grateful for California. Alabama wouldn’t be able to survive without the financial support we receive from California.
  - tjs8rj 4y ago
    This just isn’t true. Alabama’s budget has a net surplus. What you’re referring to is that fact that states like California push for major federal projects that are inevitably unaffordable by lower gdp states like Alabama - many of those projects being things Alabama didn’t ask for or want. The result is that CA “subsidizes” Alabama. So a more accurate statement would be “if it weren’t for California, Alabama would continue to exist just fine, and would live more closely in accordance with its values for smaller federal govt”
    - cafard 4y ago
      Darn those Californians, always doing stuff like digging the Tenn-Tom canal.

12 points by crhulls 4y ago

If this gets passed in 2024, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. There are probably a lot of homeless people who could benefit from this and wouldn’t cause issues for the hotels. On the other hand, there is also a portion of the population that will harass guests, wreck rooms, and cause other problems. I wonder what the vetting process on who gets room through this initiative looks like.

politelemon 4y ago

I am not from the US. I have vaguely heard that many large cities have homelessness issue. But, I am guessing that the homelessness problem must be pretty severe for the council to consider such a measure? It doesn't look like it's happening yet: > After a day of hearings, the Council, perhaps swayed by a huge hotel industry turnout, voted down the initiative. But the Council then voted 12-0 to put the initiative, which had 126,000 signatures, on the ballot for March 2024. Is this ballot aimed at voters, or is it a ballot aimed at city council members? And pardon my cynicism but that's really far away, it's enough time for the hotel industry mentioned above to sway the people involved to vote against it, no?

bergenty 4y ago

gamblor956 4y ago

LA has a voluntary version of this, Project Roomkey, which launched during COVID. It is still ongoing, but almost all of the hotels participating have withdrawn from the program. Every participating hotel reported substantially above-average damage to hotel property (meaning, above the normal damage caused by non-homeless hotel guests), most participating hotels reported bed bug infestations that cost tens of thousands to eliminate. That doesn't include the dozens of suicides, murders, and rapes that took place at participating hotels. TLDR: it turns out that housing isn't actually the solution to homelessness, because for most of LA's homeless, homelessness is just a symptom of untreated mental illness or uncontrolled drug use.

captainzidgel 4y ago
If housing isn't the solution to homelessness, what is? Telling drug addicts to get clean before they get a home? I'm sure it's really easy for people with drug addictions and mental illnesses to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and conquer those while sleeping out in the cold, especially in Skid Row where you're living around 6 drug dealers. Housing comes first, social work should follow. If the government doesn't absorb the costs of property damage when housing the homeless, they're going to absorb the costs of policing the homeless on the street. I will admit it was inconsiderate of the homeless to take bed bugs with them to the hotels. They should have just chosen to not get bed bugs when sleeping in blankets they pulled out of garbage bins.
- gamblor956 4y ago
  Forced hospitalization is the only proven way of dealing with severe mental illness and drug addiction. Stable independent living only matters once a person is sober and sane enough to use it.
- Teever 4y ago
  So how many people have you taken in lately?
- primax 4y ago
  Given the circumstances, it's viable for treatment to come before housing. The reason we don't house the homeless is a percentage of them destroy whatever is given to them. So, use the treatment process to get them well first.
  - captainzidgel 4y ago
    I may have been too snarky in my original response but my point is this: treatment before housing implies treatment on the street, which I cannot believe is productive. I don't care what meds you take for your schizophrenia, sleeping on the streets is a form of mental assault in itself. If you're trying to beat a drug addiction, the people surrounding you are going to work to undo everything your support groups and methadone clinics are doing for you. America is obsessed with homeless people proving themselves "worthy" before getting public assistance and it isn't working. Finland has actually been solving homelessness by providing homes first, treatment second. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle-helsinkis-radical-solution-to-homelessness https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle...

djohnston 4y ago

Lead the way California XD, we will continue watching with morbid fascination.

nso95 4y ago

Well I guess they'll see many hotels decide to close

truffdog 4y ago
And then people will complain about all the AirBnB rentals everywhere...

anm89 4y ago

Not going to lie. I get a lot of schadenfreude out of watching California repeatedly footgun itself.

hollywood_court 4y ago
As an Alabamian, I am grateful for California. Alabama wouldn’t be able to survive without the financial support we receive from California.
- tjs8rj 4y ago
  This just isn’t true. Alabama’s budget has a net surplus. What you’re referring to is that fact that states like California push for major federal projects that are inevitably unaffordable by lower gdp states like Alabama - many of those projects being things Alabama didn’t ask for or want. The result is that CA “subsidizes” Alabama. So a more accurate statement would be “if it weren’t for California, Alabama would continue to exist just fine, and would live more closely in accordance with its values for smaller federal govt”
  - cafard 4y ago
    Darn those Californians, always doing stuff like digging the Tenn-Tom canal.