I can understand why they would start changing their minds up there. I can't hardly stand the smell of the street/sidewalks in S.F. The smell of urine is overpowering. Just the health and safety issue are alarming. The homeless encampements here smell nasty. Ask the people who have nearby homes. I'm sure they all agree.

the times they are a changing...
i thought i'd share a link to an interesting piece in the sf gate. it seems that the progressive mecca is becoming a bit less tolerant.

"Maybe there has been an epiphany," says David Latterman, president of Fall Line Analytics, a local market research firm. "People have realized they can hate George Bush but still not want people crapping in their doorway."

can we, a smaller city with probably a smaller amount of homeless, lead the way on this issue? i'm not sure that the "sheds" are the answer, but they may be a start towards helping eliminate or at least reduce a persistent problem.

If they panhandle in front of your business call the Police.

If they are stealing the items from your recycle can on trash day call the police.

If they hangout in front of liquor stores take pictures of them drinking and take the pictures to the Fresno ABC Office and file a complaint against the store.

If they set up a camp call Code Enforcement and have them removed.

If they loiter all day at FAX bus stops call FAX and report it and the stop location.

They will learn fast that they are not welcome and that its not their neighborhood to do as they please.

Instead of enabling street people its time to let them know they will not be allowed to bring their drugs, liquor and crime into our neighborhoods and our parks.

The street thieves, drunks and druggies don't want help.
They have already said they won't stay there if they cant have drugs and liquor.
My neighborhood has been in the City over 50 years.
We don't have proper sewer drainage on our treets when it rains.
Our roads and alleys are not repaired.
Our sidewalks don't get fixed.
We pay taxes and utility bills for these services.
The street people don't pay anything except taxes on liquor.
Most of their money comes from drug sales or things they steal to recycle.
After they have blown their government check and sold their food stamps.
Homeowners and working peolpe need their neighborhoods fixed before blowing it on enabling a bunch of drunks and druggies.
If the Pov can't take care of itself maybe its time to shut it down.
Stop enabling them.
They are not homeless they are there by choice!
Wasting money on sheds won't solve the problem.
The street people don't want to change.
Bubba needs to get agressive and force them to conform to the rules or get out of Fresno.
Ban panhandling in the middle of streets.
Ban Panhandling 20 feet from the entrance to any business.
Then theyd have to stay away from the mall and downtown.
Put up signs stating no soliciting or bothering customers.
Start limiting and doing away with shopping center reycling centers in high crime areas.
Its time to ban them from bringing bags of recycling stuff on city buses.
Seats are for people not old Rastus and his 20 black trash bags of bottles and cans dripping everywhere.
No more letting them bring wheelchairs loaded with reycle stuff on the city buses.
Wheelchairs and chair lifts are for handicaped people not for hualing junk.
If they don't like it they can go.

Ok, I'll admit it $3.78 a person a day is great. I have no clue what a vente latte is, but I'm thrilled you can get one for $3.78. I get a whole bag of Folgers for $4.40. Regardless, I still think a long term solution is a better plan. Take the $250,000 build/or buy a bigger shelter, not a bunch of tool sheds.
Help them in getting into programs that can help their individual needs. If they need rehab,mental health or help getting disability then assist them with that.
We still need affordable housing for lower income people. Help to prevent some from becoming homeless in the first place.

(Fresnoise-all)

That's kind of the problem...

You see, back ten to twenty years ago, (yeah,) the thought 'give them apartments,' was somewhat true...

What happened.

-First off, there was the process of a person (male or female,) getting into the 'system,' and documenting their living situaion.
-They were put onto as much public assistance as was allowed, (not much, actually,) which was called 'getting them onto benefits.)
-There was then a very small public assistance amount that they got each month, (again, very small,)
-They were allowed residence in a shelter (totally dorm setting, which meant a bed, some linens, (weekly,) laundry days, (somewhat,) of a clothing allotment, and meals in the chow hall.
---There was also substance abuse counselling, (if needed,) as well as various forms of training, (GED, etc.)

--All of this with intention of them keeping their appointments with case managers, and working through various plans designed to help them get their lives back together.

-In a 'best case scenario,' a person who was living in a shelter had a six to nine month wait, during which, some of them had the chance to work in varying programs (for a very small payment,) to assist in the varying services, --or work in various programs.
The best case scenario was a 'perfect world,' goal, it rarely ever happened, and rarely ever happened that fast, usually it was years.

-What happened to all of the initial work (programs, etc.)
-The programs got radically cut back, -so there were less staff to do everything from basic drug and alch. counselling, basic case management, (nearly all,) of the educational and trade programs were wiped out,
---and so many people got into the system that there was a massive log-jam where Section 8 housing became kind of like the Titanic (women and children only were eligible.)

When I left the system (as a case manager,) (late 2004,) the men in my shelter (1001 beds,) had a waiting period of 7 to 9 months (if everything went perfectly,) to which they were eligible for SRO's (Single Room Occupancies,) or would be in an apartment setting where there would be (maybe,) two guys to a room, or one guy per room, with a common bathroom and shared kitchen.
-Honestly most of these places were pretty bad.

What happened further?
-The guys would get only a small amount on public assistance, -but that amount would only leave them with like 10.00 per month (AFTER) they paid for their SRO,(when you got placed, your amount went down, -and the SRO was taken out of your benefit money.)
---So it was technically imposible for them to really live anywhere ---and afford such things as food.
-If they got a job anywhere, they their 'public assistance was taken, --and the regular rent fees were applied. (Regular rent fees in NYC are enormous, you need to make at least 40k per year just to 'kinda' make it.)

Worse?
The programs meant to assist with subst. and alch. abuse counselling, were next to non-existant, --and if a guy was found to be using (or even drinking what would be considered a small amount,) -he'd get kicked out of his residence.

Due to the problems within the system?
It was not uncommon for those who were working their program and (even,) keeping up with everything, (making their appointments, etc.) --what was supposed to be a 7 to 9 month wait, --became (in many cases years.)
--The amount of SRO's also began to dry up, or go up in price, (Section 8 was not an option for men,) -so you had massive amounts of people stalled out in shelters.

You also had shelters that were running at (near,) or (over,) max capacity (which is highly illegal,) --and people literally riding around on busses, or sleeping on benches (in the shelters,) -as there was noplace to put them.

The mayor's answer to the problem?

He declared that 'there were no homeless,' --and simply shut down the shelters.
-There were several reasons for this, but the end result was: you had people basically turned out in the street again after having only partially made it through the process.
--One of the reasons why a lot of the programs (as well as retraining and educational programs, one of which I authored and was teaching,) --was so that all of the staff could focus on finding the people (that we knew of,) who were in the shelters for extremely long periods of time, ---as well as those who were 'noticably,' mentally ill, --to try to get them into 'higher care,' programs as soon as possible.
--There was also a real push to get the Vets taken care of as well, (as their coverage and care was usually covered by the Fed, as well as private groups (other Vets usually.)
---Even then this method was painstakingly slow, -as the system moved so slow, -and there was such an insane ratio of cases to staff.

This did not mean that (as in the case of my shelter,) that there were 'simply 1001' guys back on the streets, ---but that there were thousands more (just aged 35 and up,) who now had nowhere to go.
--My shelter was the largest in the country, and the other shelters (who had younger populations,) were also being closed all around the city.

(A minor) problem was that some of the guys didn't want SRO's because they didn't want 'roomies,' (literally,) as (in a lot of cases,) they had no control over who they were rooming with, --and what they were like.

But the whole rumor and reputation:
'plug into the NY system, it's the Cadillac of Homeless Systems,'
-as it's (still,) known?,
---in fact collapsed under it's own weight, ---and overload, years ago.
--People are still headed to NYC on that premise that the system and the shelters and 'programs,' are better than anything that they have (anywhere else,)
-Not even knowing that, for the most part, it's been dismantled.
(My Shelter was officially closed in July of this year, because it was, in fact, extremely dangerous, and there were massive problems with community / shelter resident interractions. (We were getting guys dumped into our shelter who were completely not ready (or in a lot of cases not able,) to live in regular society at all, (due to a variety of reasons.)

The shelter population (men: 35 and up,) was comprised of:

-Those who were now homeless after living borderline due to tight funds.
-Released inmates
-Psych patients
-People who had 'been homeless,' and in the system for a long time
-'Undocumented,' persons from other countries
-TONS of people of all of the above, arriving to the system from (not only,) all neighboring states, -but from clear across the country, --and from other countries.

Again: a major concern, (particularly with my crossection, Men aged 35 and up,) were what were called 'Long Term Stayers,'
--These were people who, (because they had no place else to go,) had been in the system (at least,) 5 to 10 years, (often times bouncing from shelter to shelter,)
--Or had been (even in some cases, in our own shelter,) upwards of 10 to 20 years.

I had guys who had been homeless, and in shelters, in some cases since the 60's.

Some of them were 'dodging,' the system, while living in it, and had managed to figure out ways to bounce around, still get their needs met, -but had no other places to go.
-A lot of them, (whether they started out this way, or simply had become this way having been homeless for so long, succumbing to the conditions,) were mentally ill, and had extreme difficulty fully coping and comprehending with everyday life, and were going on very base survival skills. (Living 'homeless,' is an extremely damaging and deteriorating thing for a person, -both mentally and physically.)

We had an enormous problem (like hundreds, just in my shelter alone,) with people who were staying there who we really didn't know who they were at all, had submitted false information (deliberately,) and who were wanted.
We had a problem with folks who (due to their deteriorated mental state,) who didn't know who they were anymore, and, quite often, other residents would approach us and say: '...This guy's really in trouble, or This guy IS trouble, you need to get him out of here.'
--But the problem was, due to the severe size of the population, a person could bounce through from shelter to shelter (and state to state,) for months or years and never really be seen by anyone, or really documented.
That was a major concern, and was taken advantage of by a lot of people.

Further long and the short of it?
What is supposed to be 'temporary,' anything, -more often than not becomes full-time, long term, --and (even that,) once word gets out that (anything,) is available? Attracts tons more folks.
--Just like the NY system attracts thousands each day, and still is attracting, (though it's a burnt out hull of what they've been told of...)

The cost is huge, the degree of staffing and funding for programs is huge,
It takes an advanced tracking system to really determine who these folks are, (just as a matter of public health,)
--and you have to have a community that feels that it's a 'good thing to help out others,'as a form of civic duty, -and who also can trust in the system to care for those in need.

--I am not so sure that Fresno is that, yet,
--or if it ever will be.

There are a lot of factors that cause me to have my doubts.

They want to put up 44 sheds. Each shed will provide shelter for at least 2 people. That's 88 homeless with a roof over their head for now.

the $250k for the project is spit in the bucket and very reasonalble.

as for the $10k per month - let's do the math:

($10,000.00 / 88) / 30

do you understand that equation? in long form that 10,000 divided by 88 - then take that and divide it by 30.

THE ANSWER: $3.78

That's 88 people with a roof over their heads for $3.78 per day - less than you pay for vente latte.

Who cares if its temporary; life is full of temporary solutions.

A SHED IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

In case you dont know, the Homeless have NOTHING to pay. The sheds are FREE housing. Affordable housing is another issue. Many homeless people will NEVER be able to afford a house.

Lazarus
www.bloggingbroker.com

It shows compassion to give them sheds. It's better than under an overpass or a tent. I hear that in NYC they give them apartments, fully paid for. And yet some refuse to live in them.

What has to happen is:

-restructuring/rehab. programs have to be developed, so that there is a definite process (with checkpoints,) where a person who is in need has their needs addressed, their health concerns (phys - psych) stablized, as well as financial counciling and a (reasonable,) plan (with sustainable income/living plan,) established...

---Picture a situation: (similar to,) when you drive your car in one end of a building, it gets fueled, all fluids checked and topped off, a tune up, then thoroughly cleaned, vacuumed, and buffed out ---then driven out the other end (many processes, happeing while it's moving along the conveyor...)

Now, picture doing that with human lives, -and they don't move as smoothly as a Crown Vic on a conveyor, lemme tell ya.

A serious program is actually (initially,) intensive, it goes after several facets at once, all with the understanding that there is also a definite time to leave it and be better off than when one came in.

THAT system has to be closely monitored, closely supervised, and have limitations as to how many people can be in it at once.

--Further? It takes complete cooperation both by the participants and the local community, the medical,psych,financial professionals, (as well as places that are willing to hire those who are employable,)
--so that the person, who goes through this rehab. doesn't just loop back around again and again.

Another concern?

IF a system can be developed where a person can make the transition from being homeless with a lot of med/psych/financial concerns --TO-- having a decent roof over their heads (like a SRO, or Semi-Assisted Living?)

There has to be a 'cut off,' point,
or method of identifying who is 'Fresno's' homeless, ----and who are 'Everybody Elses,'

---Because, the reality of it is:
If a legit. development/rehab. program is built, and a process is worked out where people go from being 'homeless,' to 'in homes,'
--you will suddenly find yourself swamped (and not just swamped with people who you didn't realize were in such rough shape,
---but people from all around who want to go through this system as well...
(You see, what happens is: there is a fine line between people who have crashed and burned (who are homeless,)
-and those who are 'barely making it,' who, IF a program becomes available? Will simply let go of the bar, and fall into the lower catagory...

(I used to get people from all over the world, -including this area back in NY, who heard that 'if they got into the NY Homeless system, -all their dreams would come true, (because we had not just 3 hots and a cot, but had schooling, counselling, trade-training, as well as jobs on the other end (AND) section 8 housing...)
---Problem was?
We USED to, ---then the system overloaded, and it became hopelessly jammed, stranding thousands and thousands of people for years in a process that was supposed to take only a few months...

-It was (finally,) mostly shut down, with a lot of people back out on the streets, ---with new 'buddies,' from all over the world in the same situaition.

-And trust me, NYC has tons more money, facilities, training, professionals, and system of human services that is over a hundred years old,(and that's just the buildings...)

Until Those issues are established and run through several times?
Small Sheds, and the system at hand is a way of assisting that will effectively meet the 'immediate,' need.

Is it pretty? Does it reach the ultimate goal in twenty minutes? No.
But the whole process isn't pretty, it takes time, and you have to understand that it will have a lot of steps and immed. measures that will look a little strange, (but still be effective.)

Personally, I think it's cool that the mayor found the scratch to put up more sheds.

-And the rest of you may do well to volunteer to serve up a meal at the POV or Mission, Maybe sort out some food at the Food Bank, do some gleaning of your fruit trees, (yes, the foodbank takes gleaned fruit, ---and it goes out into the community almost instantaniously,)

---And, with the season change?
Go through your clothes wash'm up, and donate the ones you don't need (that are in good shape,) to either PineDale's community center, (they're excellent,)
---or talk to the FNB folks and bring them around when they're doing lunch...

PS:
If you have clothes that you don't want (and have stuff to donate?
Email me.

I also happen to be close to the lady who does the 'Sleeping Bag Project,' --so if you have any of them (you can go out and purchase them for 14.00 at Sports Authority, -or donate your older ones,)
LET ME KNOW (or, again, shout out to the FNB'rs)

I have a pickup, will come and get the stuff from you, and will make sure that it goes to the right folks.

(Summer's over, clean out your closets, give me a yell.)

-Eric

While agree we need a long term solution, this will get some of these people off the streets (for now).

But,if all our council and mayor can come up with are tool sheds, maybe it's time to elect better city officials. All of the council members have been in office for a while, why haven't they come up with a solution or at least publicly announce an idea? Unfortunately two of the Council members that voted against this might be looking to their future in politics not necessarily for a solution for the homeless problem.

Mayor Autry has come up with the $250,000 needed for the sheds. The city is also scheduled to meet with Fresno County leaders November 7 to help plan a long term solution to help the homeless according to this morning's Bee.
http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/155515.html

I have to agree with the city council on this matter. The cost of the $250,000 temporary fix is a bit high,as is $10,000 a month for food, clothes, and blankets . Instead of buying tool sheds for homes, build affordable housing for low income people and disabled people. If there was affordable housing available, some of these people might not become homeless to begin with.

The Council did vote 4-3 in favor of the sheds but failed in approving funds to build/provide the sheds. The three who voted no for funding wanted a more permanent solution to the homeless problem then just providing sheds. I agree with them that a long term solution is better then a quick fix.
http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/154458.html