A proposed law currently being deliberated on the California state assembly will require major cities in California to provide and maintain “safe parking lots” for homeless people who live in their cars or recreational vehicles.
The proposal comes even as Los Angeles and San Francisco are already struggling under the weight of large homeless populations.
However, the California state assembly is of the opinion that the growing street communities are due to the lack of affordable housing rather than because of refusing to enact basic laws for matters like public health and loitering.
This is why the assembly wants to help those who adopt “alternate” modes of housing such as living in old RVs, cars, and other movable housing, by providing them sustainable communities in existing parking lots.
According to CBS Sacramento, Assembly Bill 891 already passed one house and is on its way to the other house in California’s legislature. The measure will require major cities and counties to “provide a safe parking lot, including access to bathrooms, to those with no place to stay.”
The bill’s author claims that the measure will help in the “transition” from homeless encampments to permanent housing although his bill didn’t elaborate on how.
“Establishing a safe parking program in California’s most populated cities and having at least one in each county will provide a safe place for vehicle dwelling,” he told CBS.point 322 |
“These programs can be overseen and controlled by local entities, they will result in these vehicles being moved away from nightly street parking and into designated lots, and create a sense of normalcy for individuals who are living out of their vehicles.point 221 |
The goal of this measure is to help transition these individuals into more stable and permanent housing.point 88 | ”point 91 | 1
In its original form, the bill would have applied to all California counties but the draft that passed the California Assembly revised this to only cover cities and counties with over 300,000 people. Los Angeles and San Francisco are obviously included as well as 35 other localities.
From a law enforcement and management perspective, the proposed bill makes sense.point 70 | However, there are no stipulations in the new law that would prevent long-term homeless encampments from mushrooming in locations other than the “safe parking lots.point 216 |
” For example, both Los Angeles and San Francisco already host de facto homeless communities on streets and sidewalks, as well as in abandoned buildings and alleys.point 144 | In fact, in San Francisco, these homeless encampments are so full to bursting that a few of the homeless have resorted to living in “houseboats” made of makeshift boats and rafts on San Francisco Bay.point 322 | 1
With a long-term solution to homelessness unlikely, both cities have resorted to just managing the problem and mitigating its impact on those paying rent or buying homes. However, the way they manage the problem can also be quite costly.
For example, San Francisco has created a “Poop Patrol” whose members are paid in six figures just to keep San Francisco’s streets as poop-free as possible. And the city government has promised to provide additional public toilets and toilet banks which are expected to cost around $8 million.
Los Angeles is following a similar path but since operating one portable toilet and shower facility in a homeless encampment costs the city roughly $300,000 a year, the full program comes out to a staggering $50 million.
This has led critics to point out that both cities could save more money just by enforcing existing laws government loitering, public urination, or overstaying on public property, but neither Los Angeles nor San Francisco seems willing to adopt that solution.
Recommended Video!
“Ruthless Jogger Who Threw Out Homeless Man’s Belongings Into A Lake Is Arrested And Charged With Robbery”