Wednesday, December 15, 2004

...Recently the Santa Clarita City Council decided they were strapped for cash and voted to 'outsource' as many as 140 homeless people to the Downtown Los Angles area. They were to pay a local church $36,000 to run the buses out of Santa Clarita

The buses were to travel southeast on State Highway 126 to the Antelope Valley Freeway and then South on Interstate 5 for several miles, exit at Main Street, continue west for several blocks and have the mostly unwilling passengers added to the thousands of homeless already in the area.

Stories tell us this is an act that has happened repeatedly for years in the Downtown area. Phoenix, Denver, Chicago have all been mentioned in the telling of the Los Angeles one-way ticket for vagrant residents of these locals.

The audaciously scandalous part of this scenario is the Santa Clarita City Council boldly agendaized and discussed the issue in an open council.

The relocation of the passengers moved as disposable chattel from one location to another was justified "as we cannot afford it here but our tax dollars are at work in Downtown Los Angeles."

Several business leaders, Arts District and Downtown residents, and social service providers in Los Angeles and the Mayor of Santa Monica were so angry at Santa Clarita's decision they were prepared to personally drive to Santa Clarita and attend a City Council meeting to voice outrage.

Ultimately, the Los Angeles City Council voted to approve a resolution that officially denounced the plan to 'outsource' the homeless to Los Angeles, and after strong efforts by Councilwoman Jan Perry and staff assisted County Supervisor Mike Antonivich who found a parcel of unincorporated land in which to relocate the homeless for a temporary shelter.

Most of us have a problem understanding why a city would move homeless to an area already bulging at the seams and overcommitted to the seriousness of the homeless problem.

Below is an opinion column from a Santa Clarita newspaper, however infuriating, trying to explain their right to make that decision.

An unedited opinion from a Santa Clarita newspaper The Signal follows:

Needy Suffer Under L.A. City's Denial of Access to Programs
Leon Worden Opinion and Multimedia Editor
12/10/2004

The Los Angeles City Council really did a number on Los Angeles County's homeless population
Wednesday when it voted to shut all shelter doors to individuals from Santa Clarita and
86 other cities across the county. Downtown council members seem to think Santa Clarita
and other cities want to "outsource" their "homeless problem" to Los Angeles. That kind of
myopic thinking demonstrates a gross lack of understanding of who the homeless are, what
assistance they need, and how that assistance is provided.

Fact is, homeless individuals are as different as you and me.
They aren't numbers to be counted like beans or sheep, or cattle to be herded up.
Some have cars. Some don't. Some have jobs. Some don't.
Some need a roof over their heads while they find a place to rent.
Some need help finding a job.
Some need federal housing assistance. Some need medical help.
Some need mental health services. Some need multiple forms of assistance.

The agencies and facilities and programs that are designed to meet those needs are
as unique and different as the people they serve.
Some of those agencies and facilities are in Santa Clarita.
Some are located elsewhere in Los Angeles County.
Under the plan approved by the Santa Clarita City Council, a case worker assigned
by the nonprofit Lutheran Social Services of Southern California would assess
local homeless individuals' unique needs and refer them to the specific agencies
that are best equipped to help them surmount their unique
difficulties.

One's case worker might advise him to spend a few days at the Santa
Clarita WorkSource Center to find a job, show him how to apply for federal
housing assistance, and refer him to the Samuel Dixon Family Health Center
for a medical checkup.
Another individual might need housing reasonably close to a facility -
or close to transportation that can get him to a facility - that can provide
competent mental health care.
Another might benefit from a long-term recovery plan designed to end his
cycle of homelessness. For instance, Union Rescue Mission runs a unique
program where individuals can get help finding a job, bankroll their savings
while living in the shelter for up to two years, and then apply that savings
toward private housing.

You and I subsidize part of the cost of Union Rescue Mission's programs
through our county, state and federal taxes. But the facility is located in
the city of Los Angeles, and now, in what would likely be found an illegal
decision if challenged in court, the L.A. City Council won't let Santa
Clarita or any other city provide transportation to it.
Santa Clarita shouldn't and wouldn't work that way. If an agency in
Santa Clarita offered some sort of unique program that could benefit someone
living in the San Fernando Valley, and a case worker referred a client to
it, you wouldn't see our City Council putting up a stink - especially if the
city of Los Angeles were helping underwrite the cost of services for that
individual, as Santa Clarita is doing.

When the Santa Clarita City Council put "creative homeless services" to
a competitive bid, it wasn't kidding about the "creative" part. Certainly,
it would benefit local care givers and particular homeless individuals to
have a temporary winter shelter in Santa Clarita, but that is one small part
of the solution. You don't fulfill your Christian duty or pay off your
Jewish guilt by saying, "Let there be a Santa Clarita homeless shelter," and
wash your hands of it. It isn't the be-all and end-all.

It truly does take creativity and a collaboration of public, private and
nonprofit agencies to operate programs not only for people who have no home,
but also for many who are one or two paychecks away from homelessness.
When local residents come to The Signal office to donate foodstuffs for
the SCV Food Pantry, they are doing one tiny, yet vital, part. When the
Santa Clarita City Council put up $36,000, or $375 per person, to assist
Santa Clarita's estimated 96 homeless adults, it did a part. When the
nonprofit Santa Clarita Community Development Corp. set up a winter shelter
the last seven years and offered to do so again this year, it did a part.
When Lutheran Social Services stepped in to work one-on-one with homeless
individuals and line up services for them, it did a part. When Supervisor
Mike Antonovich agreed to underwrite most of the cost of services and
potentially provide a temporary shelter site in Santa Clarita, the county of
Los Angeles, whose job it is to provide health and social services to the
indigent, did a part.

After the county's Santa Clarita shelter closes March 15, there still will be plenty of work
for all of them to do.
The city of Los Angeles must continue to be a part of the solution. The
private, nonprofit and government agencies that comprise the regional
network for helping homeless and other needy individuals in Los Angeles
County can't abide the withdrawal of one of its biggest components.

Leon Worden is The Signal's opinion and multimedia editor.. His column
represents his own views, and not necessarily those of The Signal.

One final note, it is agreed that everyone needs to do their part. Many of the presented "facts' in this opinion piece are reflections that represent a community and a nation misinformed. The current conditions of the homeless are deplorable. In recent years more and more women, children and families are being added to the mix. In the Arts District we have noticed the increase of men and woman on the streets, the encampments and the petty crimes.

Los Angeles has offered assistance to other communities in education, information and learning sessions and programs to deal with their crisis. Many Social Service Providers are seeking volunteers to fulfill these programs. Most can be googled with Social Service Providers Los Angeles

Also read Ramona Crimson's column on "The day They Buried Ronald Reagan" with an opinion as to how we got to this point.

Qathryn Brehm