No one could miss the hum of anticipation in the room that Sunday in late February. Hundreds of people from across generations gathered at tables that filled the giant Earl Warren Hall. Never mind that it was beautiful outside; the buzz was all about getting up at 3 a.m. the next day to begin a momentous three-day survey of the homeless. Among the all-volunteer crowd were retirees, teenagers, church members, and the formerly homeless. A similar scene was playing out in the North County.
In a time of high economic anxiety, such altruism was surprising. But there everybody was, receiving instruction on how to interview street homeless people and getting to know their teams.
It’s been nine weeks since that day, and though the excitement has dissipated, the results of all that good will are tangible. At a public briefing Monday, May 9, the results of the 1,143 surveys taken during Registry Week were announced. The briefing also launched the second phase of the campaign, when organizers will begin to find homes for the most vulnerable people surveyed — the ultimate purpose of this effort.
But the data gleaned from the surveys did not, in the end, reveal startling new facts about our homeless population. It did confirm trends that our Public Health officials had found in earlier studies: that the majority of the homeless in this county are male, middle-aged, and burdened with multiple chronic illnesses; that a majority (57 percent) have a mental illness, and 77 percent have spent time in jail in the past year. Of those surveyed, 932 were found to be at risk of premature death based on a scoring system created by Boston-based physician Jim O’Connell, MD, and tweaked by the medical director of Santa Barbara’s Health Care for the Homeless program, David Lennon. The person at the top of the list — a woman who’s been on the streets 16 years and has cirrhosis of the liver, hepatitis, schizophrenia, HIV, chronic obstructive pulmonary artery disease (COPD), and is an alcoholic — has the highest vulnerability score of all.
Paul Wellman
Barry K., 62, showing where doctors at Cottage Hospital installed a pacemaker after he had a heart attack last winter. A recovering alcoholic who has worked for years as a cook, he does not consider himself homeless.
The piece of data that is new, and that will be a source of controversy, comes from the question of where people came from and if they were homeless in that place, too. Of those being queried, 44 percent reported being from out of town, and 55.7 percent were residents here before becoming homeless. Of those who came from other places, 5 percent said it was the promise of services that drew them.
As Doctors Without Walls-Santa Barbara Street Medicine founder Mimi Doohan said recently, no matter what evolves from this campaign, no matter how many or how few receive housing in this effort, our community is forever changed. We know how to come together. We’ve done it before.
How did it coalesce, after all? What spell did organizers cast to inspire so many?
Spark to the Flame
Last July, at the annual Health Care for the Homeless (HCH) conference, Doohan and Ralph Barbosa, who runs the HCH program here, heard Becky Kanis, a former Army Special Operations communications specialist who had just launched a campaign to house 100,000 of America’s chronically homeless in three years. Kanis’s campaign was targeting 55 American cities because of their known high numbers of the chronically homeless. Santa Barbara was one of them. Doohan approached Kanis later to introduce herself and invited her to bring her campaign to Santa Barbara.
Über charismatic, smart, with the unassuming confidence of a true public servant, Kanis, a West Point grad with short, bleached blond hair, is just the person to pull off something as audacious as this 100,000 Homes effort.
Paul Wellman
Michael Silvas, who works with art, said he “was the first person to take the Common Ground survey.”
In 2005, Common Ground, a New York City-based nonprofit dedicated to ending homelessness, hired Kanis to lead a new project that was trying to move the homeless in New York’s Times Square into housing. Kanis began rethinking the tired assumptions about the chronically homeless and the easy acceptance of their refusals of services — including housing. She employed motivational interviewing and eliminated middle steps in order to prevent sending people to shelters where they were often required to become sober. She offered the homeless keys. In five years, 85 percent of Times Square’s homeless were housed. Many were accessing treatment. New York City officials asked Kanis to take her approach to other neighborhoods. Soon she was getting invitations from officials in Washington, D.C., and Baltimore.
In every community, her approach is the same: Exclude no one. Every nonprofit, faith community, government agency, and lowly volunteer that wants to join the effort is welcome. Her results are as tantalizing to city administrators guarding general funds as they are to church-goers looking to live out scripture.
Last fall, a three-part series in the Los Angeles Times on the 100,000 Homes campaign that had launched in L.A. caught the attention of Rob Pearson, executive director of the Housing Authority of the City of Santa Barbara. Intrigued, he sent the story around to his staff and a few elected officials, including Mayor Helene Schneider, indicating he hoped to incorporate these ideas in his homeless projects. Soon he discovered that Doohan and two of the smaller homeless outreach organizations — the Organic Soup Kitchen and the Uffizi Mission Project — were already mapping a strategy for bringing the campaign here.
Paul Wellman
Seann Sinclaire, a nature photographer, has lived in his van in Santa Barbara for four years.
Ultimately, Kanis was invited to Santa Barbara for a series of five visits. She talked about lessons and successes of communities like D.C., San Diego, Omaha, and dozens of others. Soon, not only Pearson but also Casa Esperanza executive director and Ten Year Plan cochair Mike Foley were brought on board. Foley’s participation was key. The pull that he and Pearson have with elected officials broke the campaign open by linking it to the county’s biennial Point-in-Time count of the homeless. This countywide count, required by the federal Housing and Urban Development department in order for a county to receive essential Continuum of Care funding, was to take place in late January anyway. Linking the two surveys meant the county would also be backing 100,000 Homes, and the scope of its data would be broader and deeper.
When Kanis addressed the important gathering of South County homeless advocates, who have been gathering at Chuck Blitz’s beach house for years, she showed a short movie describing the campaign’s three basic stages: registry week, housing, and support. They asked questions, but by the time it was over, the only query left was when it would begin.
By the first week in December 2010, the 100,000 Homes project in Santa Barbara was endorsed by every homeless agency, public and private, in the county, and that’s how Common Ground Santa Babara was born.
By Paul Wellman
Gator, a longtime Santa Barbara figure, who has joined a sobriety program.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace









Previous Month



Comments
The data shows that we have virtually the came number of homeless people as coastal communiites with similar demographics, population and landmass. It shows that homeless people from other locations do indeed arrive here, but don't come becuase they are seeking services. The arrive for family, friends and climate. Will people finally put that aside and move on the soultions that have been proven to work? What is different is that the number of homeless people in many similar communities is dropping. Why? These communities are investing in proactive policing, smarter coordinated service provision and smart housing strategies. We can do that too. That is our Common Ground now. But will this happen? Will the vile rheotoric come to an end and all interests join together? Will compassion combined with responsibility win the day? Or will the attacks and fear mongering, shaming and blaming cycle be reinvigorated as is was today on one, irresponsible forum? The time has indeed come to stand on Common Ground, to bring our whole community home. I pray the the cynics will stop it and the hopeful will rise-up. I pray that the death will end and that everyone gets credit for the success that is immediately at hand. I pray that the good will not be disabled by the perfect and that ideology is released and forgiveness wins the day. All hands on deck - time to work. Everyone is about to win together.
java805 (anonymous profile)
May 11, 2011 at 11:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't think council member Dale Francisco should worry so much about why people are here.
Some are indeed here for the services. I know some people are here for the very profitable prop 13 subsidized single family residential tax breaks. Some are here for the municipal golf course. Some are here for the "entertainment" district. Some are here for recreational driving.
It is unfortunate that Dale Francisco is xenophobic. We cannot deny humans some basics, or just throw more humans into a jail, or ECT them just because we don't like them.
Sorry to not offer any positive thoughts to this otherwise enlightening article. The people highlighted are of the greatest value. I do appreciate those that get involved. It is political and representation will get the job done. Francisco, Self, Hotchkiss and Rowse have got to go. All four are a hindrance to progress on so many issues.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 6:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Where are similar programs for the elderly and disabled who do NOT choose to drown themselves in booze or drugs or refuse to take pshchiatric medications? I'd just as soon support programs aiding those honest citizens rather than continue to reward those who make bad decisions.
winddancer1562 (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 6:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
windancer, banging up on humans who have psychiatric maladies or impairments of the brain, for refusing to take their psychiatric meds is just flat out wrong. It's one thing to ask someone of sound mind to take responsibility for the consequences of failing to take their blood pressure meds or whatever. It's quite another to beat up on folks with diseases of the brain, who are not of sound mind, for such failings.
I generally support the concepts of free choice and owning your own "decisions". But when it comes to our brethren who are mentally impaired, I assert that it is we, who are of sound mind, who must take responsibility where they are unable to. Shame on us for allowing their self-destruction.
And shame on you for tarnishing the good principles of individual free choice, liberty, and self responsibility by your thoughtless and inappropriate extension of these principles to the tragic cases of the mentally impaired.
OldDawg (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 8:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
thank you for such an intelligent and thoughtful article. other stories have missed the mark and have been followed by some very nasty bloggers who simply want the homeless to magically disappear. when did helping your fellow man and taking care of the poor become a liberal agenda? how about a real solution to homelessness vs. simply wanting them out of our city? perhaps we need to jail them? oh, that's right being homeless is not a crime in our free country...and jail is a very expensive response and our jails are full. perhaps it's telling the poor they have no right to travel? oh, that's right...the right to travel is guaranteed by our constitution. make them all get a job? oh, that's right--most people will not hire mentally ill folks or those with addictions. perhaps its placing the most troubled in mental institutions? oh, that's right the esteemed ronald reagan closed them as bad places and too expensive for the tax payer to cover. instead of mental institutions, reagan said we need to build community based supportive housing for this population so they do not end up homeless. oh, we forgot to build that housing and now no one wants them in their neighborhood nor should we spend tax money to house them. perhaps we can have the "private sector and capitalism" fix this since, according to some, there is so much money to be made in taking care of the poor. that's why we have this apparent homeless industry run by poverty pimps. right? let's hear some intelligent answers to this national disgrace VERSUS let's push them down the road as they have no right to live here...or are the nasty bloggers really trying to say, "they have no right to live at all?"
jimmiethe (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at noon (Suggest removal)
winddancer--there are many programs for low income disabled persons and seniors. they receive the bulk of the housing assiatnce provided by the local housing authorities in santa barbara. unfortunately there is not enough for all who qualify for and need housing assiatnce. we need to grow the affordable housing programs nationwide to house all in need as shelter is a basic human need...including the homeless who are disabled. alcohol and drug addictions are disabilities. if you added up the amount of tax subsidy given to us homeowners through the mortgage interest and property deductions we receive, you will see that the government spends much more on housing us middle and upper income folks then we do on the poor.
jimmiethe (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a homeless and jobless individual it is not easy to get out of the trap even when you want to. To get a job, you need an ID of some kind, proof of citizenship (birth certificate), and an address. Without those, most places will not hire you. I consider myself very lucky in that I have skills that allow me to live just about anywhere. (I taught back country backpacking and survival techniques) In today's economy it is not easy to get a job. Just check out the other article written about "McDonald's Hiring" they hired 19 out of 490+ applicants just here in Santa Barbara. What incentive is there for any employer to hire a homeless person, even one who has marketable skills, when there are much so many other applicants who aren't homeless or have mental, drug, or alcohol problems? Answer: NONE. I'm not looking for a hand-out, I'm not even looking for a hand-up, and I'm sure there are more people out there like me who because of circumstances find themselves living "Homeless". For the most destitute public assistance is the only way I can think of to help, but for a lot of us its a choice. Live off the grid, in your car, illegally camp, or go hat in hand and ask the community to find us housing, except there are too many applicants for that to. I do know that it's pretty scary to think that for a lot of people they are only one paycheck away from homelessness that all it takes is one accident, one blown engine on the car your still making payments on, one poor business venture and you find yourself in a vicious trap.
ThomasGypsie (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 1:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Many homeless youth have fled abusive parents, a category often ignored.
EZK (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You did an excellent job Isabelle, capturing the event and where we need to go... the facts are that we need to continue to work together and coordinate efforts. Homelessness is complex - so solutions will be complex and multi-faceted. I have been walking with street friends for six years - have much more to learn. But I can say that we need to look at both statistics and individual stories - because each person has his or her own story. I am willing to hear everyone out - as I am involved with leadership within Common Ground. I believe in good conversations over coffee if you don't believe that these friends should be housed and cared for - I can hear you out. For all those who want to join the effort, let me know. You can find my contact info on www.commongroundsb.org or send me a message on the Common Ground Santa Barbara Facebook page.
Jeff Shaffer
syncman (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 5:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Excellent and very important story! This is the kind of journalism that reunites the divided Homo Sapiens. All news should inspire ambitious compassion like this one has for me. Tengo mucho respeto por su trabajo, Travis Pastori.
"The work of independent media is to tell the history of social struggle in the world-
The problem is not only to know what is occurring in the world, but to understand it and to derive lessons from it- just as if we were studying history- a history not of the past, but of what is happening now". -Subcomandante Marcos
Littlebrotherissmarter (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2011 at 6:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I just returned from Poor Mexico.
I saw no homeless people there!
Contrast that with a walk thru downtown LA at around 7 in the morning.....looks like something from a Felini movie.
I visited Europe last year, and didn't see any homeless people either. I this just an american phenomena?
rstein9 (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 6:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The American phenomena, rstein, is that you are severely observationally challenged. Go back and look again. They're everywhere. Always have been; always will be.
Draxor (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 7:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Poor Mexico" must be gated community in Texas.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What this survey proves is that homeless people know what lies to tell to avoid public backlash. Does anyone really believe that "55.7 percent were residents here before becoming homeless?" Was any effort made to verify this?
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pinatubo, I believe it is. That said, correct or not...why is this so important to you? You live in America my friend. The right to travel is a basic freedom in this country guaranteed by the constitution. Do you propose taking that away from some? How about a real answer to this national disgrace? SB's homeless numbers are in-line with what other coastal communities of our size and situation face. The numbers run between 1 and 2% of the total population. LA county has upwards of 80,000 homeless on any given night.
jimmiethe (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm not against anyone's right to travel. In fact, I wish some of these freeloaders living in our town would exercise that right today.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2011 at 2:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pinatube and others complain that no reliable information is verified to justify policy and spending decisions. Then when the data are collected, he just concludes the information is false because the report does not support his preconceived view of reality. Weapons of Mass Deception on a local scale.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
May 14, 2011 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This isn't reliable data. It's a collection of claims from the mentally ill and the drug addicted. No effort has been made to verify whether any of these statements are true.
Run their names through public records and find their last known address. I'll bet you find very few Santa Barbara addresses on the list.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 14, 2011 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
http://www.commongroundsb.org/commong...
At the bottom "Survey Results..." you can look at the 4 page survey questions. I suppose most could find fault with the questions and the results. Perhaps there should have been the question what street, city, county, state, country and planet were you born on. Perhaps none of us should have been allowed to move from our site of nativity.
But to me it does not matter. These people are here for whatever reason. I guess if we were a dictatorship we could throw everyone that didn't meet certain criteria into a camp on the moon. But we are not in a dictatorship. Sorry the world isn't the way you expect it to be. Time to get over your anger and hate and let people that want to help, help.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
May 14, 2011 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pinatubo could write a book of claims by the mentally ill.
EZK (anonymous profile)
May 14, 2011 at 8:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If all you have left is straw-men and name-calling, I'll conclude that everyone is conceding my point that the vast majority of the homeless in SB moved here recently.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 15, 2011 at 9:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know for a fact that at least one person that was 'born and grew up here' was not categorized that way; because the survey doesn't ask the question 'where were you born and where did you grow up.'
We know that many leave Santa Barbara for various reasons. I would presume that we have Santa Barbara natives that are homeless elsewhere. Should we do an exchange?
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
May 15, 2011 at 9:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Jeez, pay someone a compliment and it goes to their heads.
I've seen far too many native Santa Barbarans, valuable assets to our community, priced out by status seekers and speculators.
EZK (anonymous profile)
May 15, 2011 at 11:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
there should be some kind of county-run craft workshop where these guys can voluntarily participate in and create artwork or other goods that can be sold to raise funds for their care. I think that no matter how messed up you are there is still value.
SantaBarbaraDianne (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 12:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And what is it that you do that is so inspiring.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 6:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The survey could have asked the question "What was your last address in Santa Barbara?" Then we could check to see if they actually even lived here as non-homeless people.
And property prices here are irrelevant. If you can't afford housing in Santa Barbara, your choices are to move somewhere else or be homeless. If you choose to be homeless, you get no sympathy from me.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 11:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well Pinatubo, I submit that the answer to the question you suggested, "What was your last address in Santa Barbara?" is irrelevant as well. If they choose to be homeless here, rather than move somewhere else, they won't get your sympathy.
It was clear from your earlier posts that you were hostile to the homeless who come from somewhere else. Now it's clear that you're also hostile to the locally grown homeless. So really, the point of origin question throughout your thread has been irrelevant ... no matter where they come from, your bottom line is that they deserve no sympathy and just need to leave.
OldDawg (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm making 2 related points.
(1) People that choose to be homeless in Santa Barbara rather than homed in a less desirable community don't deserve sympathy.
(2) Many homeless people are moving here to take advantage of the gullible people of Santa Barbara.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 6:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
1) Your continued and repeated mantra regarding the nature of the homeless population in spite of all evidence to the contrary doesn't make your view more true - it makes you appear (even more) irrational (than usual).
2) This isn't "your" community any more than it's "their" community (at least in the view of anyone whose opinion actually matters). The sooner you get that through your (massively) thick skull the sooner you and your ilk will stop hindering solutions that will actually address the problems - with the added benefit that you'll stop looking an insensitive loon.
EatTheRich (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 7:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yay, more name-calling! You guys are master debaters.
(1) What evidence? What are you even talking about? Are you arguing that housing isn't cheaper outside of Santa Barbara? That homeless people have great jobs here they can't move away from? What?
If you choose to be homeless in Santa Barbara rather than live in an apartment in Bakersfield, you deserve my scorn.
(2) I pay my taxes, I obey the law. They do neither. I contribute to this community, while they make it worse. That makes it my community, not theirs. They can GTFO.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 8:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Pinatubo: "What evidence? What are you even talking about?"
I'd advise that you take a remedial class in reading comprehension.
Pinatubo: "If you choose to be homeless in Santa Barbara rather than live in an apartment in Bakersfield, you deserve my scorn."
And you deserve mine.
Your false dilemmas just further demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of the situation. If it weren't for people like you with your "Me! Me! Me!" attitude, solutions to this problem might have already been implemented - perhaps even at a national level. But by all mean, keep talking.
Pinatubo: "They can GTFO."
Yeah, you're a real class act. You deserve every ounce of ridicule you get, you non-contributing zero...
EatTheRich (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 9:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
LOL. The shrill personal attacks are always a nice indication that I'm winning the argument.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 9:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yet further proof that your delusions know no boundaries.
EatTheRich (anonymous profile)
May 16, 2011 at 10:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let him wallow in his own pinafilth.
EZK (anonymous profile)
May 17, 2011 at 2:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think there probably is some common ground between Pinatubo and other posters here. I figure most all would agree that, if someone faced a clear choice between being homeless in SB, and homed in Bakersfield, and chose homeless in SB ... then there's no room for sympathy. Indeed, the individual is getting just what they wanted and chose, so there is no "woe" to sympathize with. The only woe to sympathize with is the woe Pinatubo feels ... the woe that their choice puts on him/her.
Perhaps this helps identify where the real argument is: Pinatubo thinks (correct me if I'm wrong) that the overwhelming majority of homeless made a deliberate and clear choice to be homeless here rather than homed elsewhere (regardless of point of origin). Most of the rest of us think that very few folks are presented which such clear choices in life. We think that the homelessness is the cumulative result of a series of bad choices about other things, or good choices gone bad due to "bad luck". Perhaps more research, of the kind started by this survey, will yield insight that will assist the discussion between Pinatubo and others. Stay tuned.
There may also be other common ground on other points with Pinatubo. It concerns the homeless who suffer mental illness. He/She will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Pinatubo probably shares the view that on these individuals, we need to intervene. They may have made a deliberate choice to be homeless in SB vs. homed in Bakersfield, but to call it a "rational" choice is inappropriate.
Pinatubo, is there common ground that the mentally ill homeless need intervention by the community, to get them housed and attended to?
OldDawg (anonymous profile)
May 17, 2011 at 7:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Some homeless people are definitely homeless by choice -- witness the scumbag kids hanging out on State Street with their dogs. No sympathy there.
Some others are just lazy and unmotivated. They live in their car and scam people rather than pick up and move somewhere more affordable. Again, no sympathy there.
Some are truly incapacitated through mental illness. Those people should get some help. However, we've now established our town as a collection point for the homeless from other places. All these new homeless people on our streets are not locals -- they moved here to take advantage of our good nature.
I'm willing to help local people who suffer bad luck and wind up homeless. I think there are very few of them. I'm not willing to help professional scammers and lazy people. There are a lot of those.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 18, 2011 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks Pinatubo, for your forthright response. I really believe there is some good common ground here, and I think if we could just begin by acting on these areas of agreement ... we might find that the burden from areas where we disagree shrinks and becomes much more manageable.
We agree that the mentally ill homeless clearly need our help. Regardless of the homeless issues that divide us, we agree that they are our responsibility, and the concept of "choosing homelessness" is moot in these cases. However, even with these cases, some may be migrating here, placing disproportionate burden on our local resources as well as on our tourist dependent economy. This means that the solution will have to involve some level of statewide action, perhaps with matching local funds.
I think it's going to mean more taxes, to solve the problem of the mentally ill homeless. It would need to be statewide, to address the issue of migration of the mentally ill homeless. Maybe repeal of prop 13 on commercial properties only. Maybe a statewide TOT. I don't know. I just know that we need to "man up" and "woman up", and stop shirking our responsibility for taking care of our mentally ill brethren. And we'll keep shirking if we keep waiting for savings from cuts in other programs to fund this. Even if there are cuts, nobody will re-deploy the savings to help the helpless mentally ill homeless. So we probably need a ballot initiative. And a deep pocket benefactor to help fund the campaign. And the participation of the Downtown Organization could play a very valuable and helpful role, along with other merchant organizations statewide. Merchants in downtown areas are on the frontlines of the homeless issue, and lobbying from them, to deal with just the mentally ill homeless, would be priceless.
The idea would be to fund group homes with mental health workers, and to fund a legal process for committing the mentally ill homeless, and to fund intake social workers (and cops) for gathering the mentally ill from the streets.
It's a lot to do.
But it needs doing, and has needed doing all these many years while we have squabbled about the homeless and not acted in a unified way. Here, at least, we agree. We need to act, and in the process of acting together, we will learn that neither side of the argument is the big demon we thought they were.
If we could accomplish something good on the mentally ill homeless, statewide, I gotta believe that it would relieve our local resources of so much burden that we'd make a lot of improvement on the homeless cases we're less sure about and continue to debate (heatedly) ... whether they're just freeloaders, or folks fallen on hard times.
Thanks Pinatubo, for taking time to exchange views. I don't quite share all your views, but I do sincerely respect them.
OldDawg (anonymous profile)
May 18, 2011 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks. Some other people on this site could take some lessons from you on how to respectfully disagree with people.
Pinatubo (anonymous profile)
May 18, 2011 at 11:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)