AnonymousBy Anna Marie Gott
Santa Barbara has a growing homeless problem of that there IS no doubt. Tourists, downtown business people and residents have all complained about the issue which continues to grow in both size and scope. The real question is how does the City address the issue and is “springing” a homeless trailer park on residents without notice the right way to conduct business? This is a 3 year experiment that includes 40 trailers being parked adjacent to a neighborhood to house 40 hardcore homeless individuals and nearby residents of the proposed location were not consulted. This left their possible concerns intentionally disregarded and unaddressed while the City pushed ahead with a Grant Funding Application that would place a homeless trailer camp in their neighborhood for 3 years.
Noticing a simple Grant Funding Application on the City Council’s Agenda rather than a Grant Funding Application that includes a 40 unit Homeless Trailer Park at Castillo and Carrillo seems designed to bury the information to ensure that residents won’t voice their opinions. The Staff report even failed to mention anything about the homeless trailer camp or how long it would be in operation. It simply mentioned “Development of Bridge Housings” which is as clear as mud. The fact of the matter is that the City is planing to house 40 hardened mentally ill and addicted homeless individuals on rotating basis for 3 years adjacent to a residential neighborhood and they decided to limit the information provided to the public and leave neighbors out of the decision making process.
I believe that we make the best decisions when we have the most information and there IS a healthy dialog. I also believe that when the City fails to notify and allow comments that it perpetuates the belief that many residents have that the City Staff and Council do not care what they think nor do they care to listen.
Do you have an opinion on something local? Share it with us at . The views and opinions expressed in Op-Ed articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of edhat.
So you feel ENTITLED to park you vehicle and sleep in it where ever you want…? Really? And you say you teach children…? WOW! How about we take you back to where your parents live and have a person in a van or R.V. park in front of THEIR house…? See how YOUR parents would feel about that… Maybe you could ask the parents of the kids you profess to “teach” and ask if you could park in front of THEIR house…since you teach their kids and all… Unbelievable.
So are they going to kick people out of the bushes, parks, and beaches? Or, is this meant to welcome even more transients into the city? How is allowing people to live in vehicles in “downtown” Santa Barbara even an acceptable option for anyone. If I can go at least one day without seeing a vagrant trash, urinate on, harass, frighten, and generally stain our community I might have more sympathy.
It looks like this is a version of a shelter, with shared toilet and shower facilities, and meals provided by a nonprofit agency. They picture a nice looking “tiny house” version of a trailer, but it is unclear if those will be provided, or if people will bring their own shabby vehicles to live in. If they carefully screen the residents, and kick out anyone who can’t be peaceful and clean, it could be a good option. It’s not the most efficient, space-wise, but I assume there is no money for, nor interest in building a multi-story apartment building instead (which would house many more people). I wonder how they will choose who gets to live there. I’m torn about this–there is a great need for spaces like this, but, “if you build it, they will come.” There is no end to the number of people who want or need a place like this.
Last time I checked, the street was public property. And I do abide by rules. Which is why I chose a minivan and not an RV (length requirement), and why I drive up in the mountains or park on county land where I can sleep legally. But even still, I guess my van on the street for 5 hours at night is too much of a blight for our neighborhoods. Wow. I really feel welcome here in town by it’s welcoming residents…. :
I go up in the mountains because I have to to obey the laws as currently written. But that doesn’t mean I have to agree with them. I don’t understand why the simple act of sleeping in a car is so reviled and ostracized by our community. I’m not in one place all day, dumping waste, harassing neighbors, etc. I’m just sleeping. But even that is too much for some people and it’s sad.
X01660 – simply sleeping in a car is not what is so “reviled and ostracized by our community,” it’s the issues that go along with allowing people to sleep/live in their vehicles on public streets. It shouldn’t be that surprising. Again though, if you are choosing to live like this, while you’re making enough $$ to rent a studio/room, then you choose to accept the laws that govern your choice in lifestyle. If you don’t like, then rent or buy like everyone else.
It’s sad you only take from the community and do not return anything; including paying property taxes since live here in your van.
Fresno tried creating a community of garden sheds on the edge of town to house vagrants – total failure. Ruined down town Fresno – became a no go zone.
This deal is dead in the water. Don’t waste another minute on it.
Santa Bab’s version of Hamsterdam! Sounds amazing.
HASB is an ever growing monster that needs to stop. Grant after grant to grow, they have NO other option but to continually beg for more to continue to grow and the maintenance crews for HACSB are some of the laziest i’ve ever witnessed. And, most of them live down south and aren’t in SB to see the horror.
The first sentence is the equivalent of “I’m not racist but…” then you know what’s quick to follow. Anna if we don’t do this, where is your bodiless heart going to live?
Looked up the term “hardcore homeless” it said “not a real term and no news outlet should publish an article by someone who makes up something so dumb”. Anna where is your poor heart going to live if we don’t allow this to happen? The first sentence of this article was the equivalent of, “I’m not racist but…” then followed by the obvious.
“This is a 3 year experiment… “.
Yeah, right. Once they get established there will be no way to get them out. This will be like a cancer in the middle of the city, ever growing.
The Boise decision said that a city cannot ban sleeping in public if people have nowhere else to go. So, basically, if the city doesn’t provide enough shelter beds, they have to allow people to sleep on the streets. I suspect this proposal is driven more by the fact that certain homeless people suck up an inordinate amount of police time, emergency room time, etc. If they can get into stable housing, they cost less in the long run, and cause less problems for the city. This is only true for a specific class of homeless, but it is significant. I am very curious to know who will be chosen for a space in this facility, and how those decisions will be made.
Surprising… Not really. Tell the “Homeless Coordinator from Santa Barbara County who accepted the 9.2 Million Taxpayer dollars from Gov. Moonbeam Brown , “THANKS”.
You voters have yourselves to THANK as well- No sympathy here.
The Ninth District Circuit Court decisions was an unconstitutional unfunded mandate. No community can be required to provide “shelter” to an unlimited number of persons, simply because they choose to arrive in that community. Or else, that community has to allow them to sleep and camp out on the streets. Get real. This is a case that is ripe for further appeal. And even more reason the Ninth Circuit needs to be gutted and reconstituted. No community can be asked to shoulder this unlimited shelter burden; purely on the demand of any person who chooses to exploit it. That is not how our country works.
Which corner is this? The commuter parking lot, or the old tire store?
Rather than stupidly going it alone on their interpretation of the recenet “Boise Decision”, the city needs to meet with all the surrounding communities and develop a joint strategy. No way should SB be yet again the willing and sole dumping ground regionally. We do no more and no less than all the other surrounding communities. What is Montecito, Hope Ranch, Goleta, Carpinteria, Ventura, Solvang, Lompoc, Buellton and Santa Maria doing – and we do exactly what they are doing, We sink or swim together; but we do NOT become another sole magnet for vagrancy as we have allowed for too long in the past. If Coast Village Road or Las Palmas Drive is not full of street squatters, then neither are we.
Wow, a NIMBY response from someone that doesn’t represent the “M” in the acronym. I guess this person is in support of keeping the homeless; homeless. I wonder how all the people living in the adjacent creek feel about the change to their neighborhood?
City owns most of the surrounding housing next to this lot – they vote for them. Las Fuentes, Castillo Cottages and the West Carrillo half-way house. This is a company town on this particular corner.
One more power grab by SBHA – let the shaming and scolding of the public begin. Selling out the city for “free government money” has been the name of the game for years. All government grant money comes with tenacious strings attached. One more way the city makes the rest of us pay for their greed and photo-op virtue polishing.
There is a distinction between the term “Homeless”, who BTW get the help they need and “VAGRANTS” who come from all over the U.S. to vacation in Santa Barbara. They know the community accepts their behaviors and rewards it. It’s known all over the U.S.- That’s why the Amtrak and Greyhound bus gets one-way riders from other Cities across the U.S. who want to get rid of their “Chronic Homeless” or the worst of the worst Vagrants….
It’s unfortunate that the Politically Correct Speech Police have used the word “Homeless” to describe the locals who may be experiencing homelessness and the VAGRANTS who refuse drug / alcohol help and treatment as they prefer their outdoor lifestyle.
I read this as the city owned commuter parking lot. I wonder how the commuters will feel about being displaced. How much did we the city pay for that lot in the first place. “Mature trees and existing landscaping help screen the property from the street and freeway”. No, the map is deceptive, only the aerial view will be screened. Drive by this lot, or check the Google street view. Filled with this these trailers, this project is going to stand out like a sore thumb from the street. Do we really care if people can see it from 101? How meetings are hidden from the public borders on malfeasance. Over and over the city has not put items on the agenda so they can’t be discussed or changed the language so the public did realize what they were talking about. How many closed to public does the city have. They do have them. I’ve been at city hall when signs were posted, meeting closed to public. $6,018,954 is the cost over three years. Ground rent payments will cover the lost income from commuter parking. The people being housed were not paying rent on the street. Where is this rent coming from. Guess they are picking our pockets for that too.
Treatment-resistant addicts is an equally correct term. No one is forcing anyone to use the misleading term “homeless”. Just correct it whenever or where ever you see it used. We are all “homeless” when we first arrive in this city. It is what takes place after that initial “homeless” arrival that defines the current issues. Some have resources to provide their own shelter, while others simply demand others provide this for them.
SBMC 30.185.280.7 – Mobile Home and RV Parks: Landscaping, Fencing, and Screening.
a. Street Frontage. Street trees and parkway planting shall be installed and maintained in the right-of-way along the full width of the park property fronting on a street.
b. Front Boundary. A six-foot wide landscaped buffer shall be provided along front boundaries of the mobilehome or permanent recreational vehicle park property, regardless of whether or not the property fronts a public street. An ornamental wall or fence may be erected in conjunction with the landscape buffer, but shall not take the place of the required buffer. The landscape buffer shall be reviewed and approved by the appropriate Design Review body.
c. Side and Rear Boundaries. Side and rear boundaries of a mobilehome or permanent recreational vehicle park shall be hidden from view with a six-foot high ornamental wall, fence or landscape planting. The Planning Commission may reduce or waive this requirement upon finding it is unreasonable or unnecessary to require a wall, fence or landscape planting due to the nature of the existing topography or other existing conditions that might render such wall, fence or screen ineffective.
Doesn’t city hall or the police department have a parking lot that’ll hold 40 large vehicles? Let them play hall monitor all night and clean up the messes. Government employees appear to live on another planet far away from reality. The day that they allow this circus to be in THEIR front yard is the day that they can wish the same on others. Anyone on this page that is professing that it is ok to park 40 trailers for the mentally ill and addicted in a residential neighborhood, you can guarantee that NONE of them live there!
YETI – no one on this page is saying this is “ok” or a good idea. Take a deep breath and read the comments….
I agree with this; but there is a third category of “homeless” people; those who work hard but choose to be homeless; I work 70 hours a week at two jobs, make ok money, and still choose to live in my van. It saves a huge cost, lets me get ahead in terms of finances (no debt here), and is just a minor inconviencence. Sure you gotta time bathroom breaks and go to the gym to shower, but its also $1500+/mo in my pocket. I just wish the city had resources for people like me who contribute to our community (I teach your children), but chose to live an alternate living lifestyle. Simple stuff, like being able to park a minivan on the street and sleep in it without being harassed by the police, or complained about by NIMBYs who can’t engage in a little empathy in understanding that not everyone is living the dream and owns a home….
X01660 – If you’re a teacher and work 2 jobs, you should be able to afford at least a studio. If you choose to live in your car to save money, then you must also obey the rules re: overnight parking, etc. No one is judging your decision, but you can’t expect society to adapt to you simply because you choose to live an “alternative lifestyle.”
They cannot make being homeless illegal Donald, oh sorry that’s someone else…
You want to make it illegal to be poor. Wait. I feel like we’ve seen this before. In medieval times? Bring back the work houses!
What about those who don’t choose it? Some people just end up homeless. If you cannot afford a home of any kind, it doesn’t matter where you “live” (in some sense). Because you don’t have a roof. If you can’t afford a roof, would you rather not have a roof in SB or in Iowa?
RESIDEMT – Exactly on point 2. Why on Earth would they propose putting what will definitely be an eyesore as the welcoming sight to visitors coming into town off the 101 to Carillo? It’s awful! Can you imagine driving past that, and then going downtown and inhaling the hot stink of State Street? Why would ANYONE want to come back? The City doesn’t seem to care about the impressions that are made on tourists.
They’ve already decided that the Castillo/Carrillo lot is not suitable for the main Police Station, due to limited access (one-way street, no other street frontages).
If they made it illegal to envy the poor, how many of you would be pleading your case before a judge right now because you just couldn’t help yourselves?
I divide the homeless into roughly 3 categories. 1) The temporarily down-and-out, struggling to get back on their feet. There are many services for this population of homeless and they are well served. Many people avail themselves of these services and do get it together. You don’t see too many of these, but they’re out there. 2) The drug addicts/mentally ill/alcoholics. Most of these people will never be able to rejoin society without serious and expensive rehabilitation, and many do not want to. You see a lot of these wandering around town. 3). Vagrants/drifters. Often young, they come into town, congregate together, panhandle aggressively, and hopefully move on. Tough group to feel sympathy for. 4) Long-term homeless by choice. Not many of these but they can be in your face about demanding their rights and services. Often employed and “respectable”. I suspect that this is the target population for this boondoggle.
Roger – that may well be true IF they were actually paying taxes. And, of course, nobody has said anything about whether they were citizens or not.
you know more than a few of us, probably close to 80% are only 1 or 2 paychecks away from being homeless. but sure, lets just put them in jail instead. so our tax dollars pay for their room and board.
If you are one or two paychecks away from getting thrown out on the street, you definitely picked the wrong place to get your life together. Get a grip, take a deep breath and make better choices for yourself. Your future depends on what you can put together right now. Don’t waste it trying to live someplace you cannot afford ,nor allows you to build up healthy savings. This is not rocket science.
PSTARSR- The people you are referring to get help- There is help available for them- They are the “homeless…” The PROBLEM lies with the 85% of VAGRANTS that pollute our streets, creeks , alleyways, off ramps, parks, beaches, etc. They don’t care about ANYTHING or anyone. They don’t care about anything but where their next 40 ouncer or “rock” is going to come from…
Not all of the people in RV’s are from out of town either some were born right here in Santa Barbara but that won’t make a difference to those who hate them because they are poor or disabled they will find another reason to hate them. Just like living here working for the wealthy giving your life to them you get hurt your just a piece of shit to throw away.
Will somebody *please* tell me how to distinguish the good homeless people from the bad ones?
SB is a gold digger, she’ll do anything for a few bucks cuz she ain’t go any skills of her own and needs to survive.
Awww, how nice. Put a homeless trailer park so close to our downtown. As if there aren’t enough problems already happening downtown (storefront closings). Someone even suggested converting the old Macy’s to a shelter. Don’t you just love our city’s thoughtfulness in providing shelter to the homeless. WTH are they doing? I understand helping the homeless but give me a break. Is anybody using their brains? – why don’t these people who are suggesting these locations suggest they put the shelters on the blocks where they live.
Put them in the City Hall parking lot. The City Hall employees don’t need that parking lot anyway. Aren’t they following the city ideal for everyone else and walking, riding bikes and taking the bus?
United Nations report: SF homeless problem is ‘violation of human rights’
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/rapporteur-United-Nations-San-Francisco-homeless-13351509.php
From the report:
46. Attempting to discourage residents from remaining in informal settlements or encampments by denying access to water, sanitation and health services and other basic necessities, as has been witnessed by the Special Rapporteur in San Francisco and Oakland, California, United States of America,29 constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment and is a violation of multiple human rights, including the rights to life, housing, health and water and sanitation. Such punitive policies must be prohibited in law and immediately ceased.30 Following expressions of concern from the Human Rights Committee, the United States federal Government introduced funding incentives for municipalities to rescind by-laws that criminalize homelessness.31 More robust measures, however, are required.
Funny. I was just staring at that space the other day wondering its exact purpose and naively thinking that Santa Barbara has generously provided such a nice shady carpooling parking area for commuters or shoppers. But then I thought… no, SB is so whorish over income from every square inch of property that it will soon be turned into income… I thought probably high density housing to further congest that horrible dual intersection on Carrillo going under the freeway. That’s about the intelligence level of our city planners these days. Oh, but grant funding is so much better!! Who cares how the money comes in! (Tell me again how that cracker jax eyesore housing development by Milpas was allowed to be half built before anybody really knew about it?? Never mind. I know.)
As I say each time this topic is opened..
There is a written plan just sitting here, waiting to be implemented.
The FACT that I’ve sat on it for 5yrs now, only proves that NO-ONE is willing to act upon the issue..just complain & waste money.
Here’s what’s really funny; I never said I expected anything from the city, nor did I ever express that I was entitled to anything. I am a free American in America. I’ve decided that the minor inconvenience of SLEEPING (mind you, I work 70 hours a week, so you figure out what I do with my free time…) in a car in order to save over half my net income on rent is worth it. Teachers don’t get paid NEARLY as much as you think. 40k take home a year? So I’m supposed to spend half my income on a box to sleep in? I’m too old and have personal reasons that don’t allow me to share a room. I need my space. Not to mention all the other stuff that comes with renting a place. In addition, I buy everything in SB, spend as much as my free time as possible volunteering in my community. So I still obey the laws, sleep where it’s legal, don’t make a mess, yet the mere act of EXPRESSING that I wished there were services for people like me is met with accusations of greed and slovenly living. It shows an extreme lack of empathy on your behalf, and is indicative of your lack of connection to what it’s really like out there for people not born with a silver spoon.
I do need to do more research, but Ms. Gott, YOU, right off the bat, affect me negatively, like the prez. “Hardened homeless”?!?! Okay, I respect your own beliefs. I also respect the Golden Rule. “Treat others as you would like to be treated” and whatever anyone’s version is. I lived next door to a rehab house and guess what? Best neighbors I ever had! To ASSUME that people who lost homes have shady pasts, or drug issues, or alcohol issues, or criminal issues, is another type of sickness. Educate yourself about the effects, and the current and continuing effects, of the 2008 financial crisis. I can’t see State st. young travelers being granted these benefits. You are a fear mongerer.
I urge readers to read the links. I’m still perusing them. Housing First has been shown to be effective and *money saving.* Stop the most-affected patients from going to the emergency department regularly! These programs save money, just as subsidized and/or free birth control does. I’ll be writing the Council to support this program. Thank you, Ms. Gott, for publishing this here.
after reading a few of these comments, it makes me think this city is filled with a bunch of elites that look down their noses on those with less than they have. yes, people are homeless and resort to living in a trailer. Yes people also end up on the street and sleep on the beach, yes there are people sleeping under bridges, while you and your family are snug in your bed and heater blasting warm air. Instead of complaining, why not try to help? Get involved locally, donate your time at the soup kitchen or Salvation army. I have, and do so every year. I see so many of you bitching and whining about people down on their luck. Sure there are some that are there by choice…maybe. Alot of them are alcoholics that need help, war vets with PTSD, mentally disturbed people wiht no medical or mental health care. So many abandoned and vacant homes in the good ol’ USA, but our national homelessness is depressing….so again, i ask, why does it bother you that others have to resort to living in vehicles, park benches, beaches, and under bridges. go offer them help instead of getting online and complaining to an audience that doesn’t care.
To the teacher (whoever you are): You are resourcefull, consciencious, and generous with your free time, and I am impressed. If I could, I would rent to you at-cost, and would be glad that you, and not a nimbyist, is my neighbor. Thanks for maintaining a good example of how to live a right livelihood as teacher. You are no doubt outshining many of your peers and un- and ill-informed critics, a paid teacher of children and (evidently) unpaid teacher of adults. I wish you many years of continued happiness–you are certainly earning it every day that you persevere in spite of your challenges and in spite of those personalities who put you to the test.
I worked for gov’t for fewer than 8 years. I don’t support items because the useless union I was once a part of supports them! I do support Housing First policies because so far, and recently, it has proved to be most helpful, according to news and studies I have read, and results that have been reported. Yes, I have a soft heart. Attack me for that.
Hey ZEROHAWK-The City of Santa Barbara does more and spends more on “Homeless Inc.” than ANY City of its size in the United States. Every year for at least the past twenty years, the City writes a taxpayer check, for a MILLION DOLLARS, this year it was even more… There are tons of SB County and State employees here in Santa Barbara County that cater to the “homeless” that come here from all over the U.S. We have beds, showers,3 hots a day, churches that enable and support the street vagrants. There are dozens of programs that address Alcohol and Drug Abuse(ers). There is a County Medical and Psyche Clinic… There is the Santa Barbara Housing Authority that will get you an apartment if you qualify as a “chronic homeless” individual- As a matter of fact, nearly 20% of all housing units in the City of Santa Barbara are subsidized- So spare us your “woo is me”, “We are a selfish community” diatribe…
per your comment: Alcoholics, if so, should seek proper treatment and rehabilitation in/with that particular illness so said individuals may clean up and reenter society as a functioning and contributing individual. Second, PTSD and vets who suffer from such should seek rehabilitation through the VA and/or who the individual served for. This type of rehab should be specific to the trauma induced allowing said individual to rehabilitate and enter society in a functioning and contributing way. Thirdly, Metal Health and Mental Health Care for the population at large was abolished under Reagan. Perhaps it’s time for the government to reestablish some of theses programs. A temporary, 3 year tiny house parking lot rehab center WILL NOT take care of the larger problem that is really so mounting and huge is should be a Nationally discussed, addressed and remedied problem for all who need help, not some. At its core, this is a cash grab for Santa Barbara. Money hanging from tree will be grabbeth. What programs are currently under way in Santa Barbara, funded by Santa Barbara that are actually yielding any positive results. Any??
ah, here we go! Be very afraid of more brown people. htanks a whole hell of a lot, prez
Your comments about homeless services are absolutely untrue. Gawd knows where such lies originate but they are happily repeated by people like you who have so much hate toward the less fortunate. Every society has a population that needs help. SB is no different. And SB is not even high on the list of the homeless as a part of the whole. We simply have people who are jealous and bitter and unwilling to share anything.
It appears to me that 2, maybe 3 commenters have read the links that EXPLAIN THE PROGRAM. Otherwise, it’s knee jerk responses. Typical. At least have an educated opinion. This is not a vagrant trailer park! Whatever. Seems impossible to have a knowledgeable conversation these days.
ZEROHAWK …….please show us your confirmation receipt of ” The Homeless ” sleeping in your spare bedrooms…….take pictures with your iPhone and post them to this website…….then, and only then, will you have any credibility as it regards to the ” homeless problem” in SB
Yes these people SHOULD seek help but many do not know what SHOULD means many are to far gone with brain damage some need to be led. Do any of you know who actually does that in Santa Barbara? There is actually a group of people that actually care enough to go out there and help bring people who are too far gone in….The Santa Barbara Police Department that’s who they are not the only ones some police officers do it in their off time and use their own money to help..Zero Hawk is right as far as SHOULD Maybe you SHOULD tell a service person who suffers with PTSD what they SHOULD do to their face, and as far as Santa Barbara doing SO MUCH FOR THE HOMELESS through your tax money the HOMELESS really don’t see that money it’s filtered through paid saleries and Pay Offs too mostly what the Homeless gets is what volunteers give them. That is not your problem because you don’t care….
If the city follows through as they intend, this could be a really big help. According to Noozhawk, there will be “a resident on-site manager, supportive services, 24-hour security and a Police Department work station.” It won’t be a big free-for-all campground that attracts out-of-towners. I’m concerned about costs, but they (we) did receive a grant.
Do people who choose to be “homeless” get to demand where they want to live at someone else’s expense? Surely you have heard a very common and appropriate saying: beggars can’t be choosers.
Why encourage people to stay here to stay here instead of forcing them to move on to locations far more suitable to their skills sets and motivation? Nope, no more enabling poor life style choices.
Drop the lies about Reagan, it was the ACLU who closed down the state care institutions. Now tells us what happened to the billions of dollars tax payers voted on when they passed the Mental Health Services Act a decade ago, that was intended to make up for the ACLU closure of the state care institutions.
Public sector unions support this housing scheme because it requires hiring at least 5 full time social service workers to monitor each vagrant who has been given independent housing, instead of an institutional setting. Follow the money and it always leads to creation of more government union employee jobs, more union dues paid to highly political union bosses. and more drain on our tax dollars. Public sector unions are driving all the arguments here – the shaming and scolding just so they can get their fingers in even more public trough pies.
The cost is five support people on the job 24 hours a day for each homeless person. How does this reduce costs. It simply increases more government union members, you know “working families” and diverts more tax funding from infrasctructure and into more public employee pensions, perks and compensation packages. While they baby-sit vagrants one by one, instead of in a far more cost-effective institutional setting.
Three thoughts about this:
1. The Commuter Parking Lot being proposed for this vagrant camp is also one of the two finalist locations being touted by the City as the location of the new Police Station. Obviously it cannot serve both uses but the City is floating both use for it. Is this another shell game by the City?
2. Carrillo Street is the gateway to downtown Santa Barbara from the 101. Is a vagrant camp what we really want to showcase to visitors and tourists coming into town?
3. Grant funds are overused by the City, and all bureaucratic entities, to fund projects that they can’t fund from our own funding sources. But “grants” are not free money although the staff treats them as such. Grants are simply funds that have been taken from taxpayers all over the state or country by force (i.e. mandatory taxes) that then have a small portion doled back to us – after the well-paid staffs/bureaucrats have been paid – in the form of these “free money grants.
I wonder when or if we taxpayers/citizens will wake up.
Actually it was Reagan who closed the institutions my Uncle used to work for him don’t blame the ACLU they are good people though I don’t always agree with them…There are not that many good people around anymore because they are afraid of idiots.
Keep in mind the people getting the help are taxpaying citizens…
No, they are net tax takers.
Santa Barbara should make vagrancy and/or homelessness illegal. Give the folks who are cited for vagrancy a choice, either jail or leave the county. Why live here if you can’t afford to live here? So many people work 2 or 3 jobs to “live” here. The poor souls with mental issues should be in mandatory care. What happened to self-respect?
Good luck with that. The homeless advocates would take millions from the City if they tried to pass laws penalizing homelessness. They are fierce opponents and have fought the City many times.
Forget the local solutions. This is a NATIONAL problem, and should be addressed NATIONALLY. It is crazy to make SB try to solve a problem that they didn’t create. Salud Carbajal should have a list, and this issue should be pretty close to the top of the list.
Why is the City Council trying to destroy Santa Barbara?
Because they can, and want power of dependency.
9th Circuit Court ruled recently it is unconstitutional to prevent public sleeping in or on any public sidewalk or space, UNLESS no non-religious shelter cots are available . It will go on appeal. Until then, call daily at 5 to ask how many beds are available and where. SB Police have a stand-down Order from City Council. No response to callers about homeless camping on sidewalks in front of your home.
Other beach communities do not have SB problems because they don’t want them. Redondo, Manhattan and Hermosa Beach enter into regional agreements with other cities to serve homeless to keep communities economically appealing, to sustain property values, plus keep safer and cleaner. SB has much to learn but isn’t interested. Homeless are big business.
Handouts to SB are being distributed as I type. A new tourist trade: 30 months in a tiny house.
Recent 9th Circuit Ruling allows if no non-religious beds are available. PATH reports it can expand capacity but City has not authorized except in bad weather. Have you considered perhaps City wants vagrants along 101 and in bushes?
The 9th Circuit Court and the ACLU have combined to take away rights from those who “play by the rules” (job, mortgage, insurance(s), socially responsible citizens) and have given “rights” to those who are the opportunists, criminals and felons.
Thanks for reminding us of the errors of identity-lumping! A homeless person is not necessarily mentally ill, PTSD, a gypsy, a bum, or a vagrant. Too many have outlived resources, are overtaxed, have major situational setbacks. I saw my beloved former plumber at the 99 cent store: lost his home in divorce, had to sell his truck to pay child support for his young son, got depressed, and … All he needed was a helping hand to get paid work and shelter in a used car. Your points need to be communicated at Council on the public record.
To A-154…
I attempted to “share” it in the past, but this site would not print it due to the “We’ll decide what’s news or not” mentality.
Now, it’s folks such as yourself who no longer ask nicely for things, but instead demand.
When a nice person asks the Mayor to ask me with a respectful tone..I will happily submit my plan, free of charge.
Start the recall petition. Sneddon wants many more tiny houses but not in her San Rogue Peabody Neighborhood.
City is gifting to 40 lucky homeless a tiny house at a prime location at a taxpayer cost of $2500/month. Without support services our City could offer 1000 workers a tiny house for $600/month; and 2000 workers a place to park their vehicles with shower, toilet, trash service and water for $360/mo. Thank you Reps Dominquez and Rowse for voting for better solutions to benefit more residents, and against this insanity to serve only 40 at $2500/mo.
At a $4M cost, City is gifting to 40 homeless a tiny house for 30 months in a prime location at a taxpayer cost of $2500/month with social services. Is this the highest and best use for $4M? How about 2000 tiny houses for workers at $500/month? Other beach communities – Redondo, Hermosa, Manhatten- do not have a homeless problem: why? Regional solutions: shelter cots in lower cost areas for $850/mo with social services.
Maybe those people who are not happy with the homeless receiving help here should move somewhere else… There are far more affordable places that have Like minded people who hate homeless and poor people where they can all live and be happy together. America is still a free country where people can choose where they would like to live but some people are not happy with their neighbors perhaps they can find another place to go….
Thank you Ms Gott for your excellent letter, for calling much about what’s occurring Citywide to our attention. I hope others contribute to your support to provide this beneficial watchdog service.
so you’re against helping people with less than you? you would rather them sleep on a cot in some warehouse rather than in a safe space? wow…just remember this when you or one of your own ends up in that position…because it can…and it will happen.
where have you been? our city council has run this town into the ground. our mayor elect included. …this city counsel has abandoned downtown.
thats because they are NOT sleeping on the sidewalk in front of your house, my house, or someone elses house, and if they were, be a good human and offer a blanket or some warm soup and don’t be a dick.
the people in this city are really starting to act like over entitled elitists. grow a heart.
We want more, all people helped including those of us stakeholder homeowners living on the edge taxed and fee’ed to the hilt.
PROTEST @ Council’s HOMES. – The decision to fund “tiny trailer homes,” and to focus on the mentally ill and addicts when we have domestic violence victims, seniors, veterans, youth and families that could have been served is outrageous. This was not the only option, but Staff, and the Santa Barbara Housing Authority made it sound like the only one. Check this out: https://zoomgrants.com/gprop.asp?donorid=2133
Without jobs, or receiving lower wages in other cities (“Lots of places”), many would still be homeless. Not by their choice. There are homeless people most everywhere. Hawaii has them EVERYWHERE! Many of them with family roots going back over a hundred years. Most cities don’t want them there. Where do they go? “Lots of places”… Doesn’t answer the question.
I don’t like the idea of protesting at their homes. That also puts them and their entire family in possible danger, as some people don’t know how to have a ‘civil’ gathering/protest. It would probably mean police protection for the house and family members. A great way to spend more money!!??
This is going to be amazing! 40 Tiny homes = approximately 80 people off State Street (they’re is going to be round ups, then they’ll be deposited at the site). Then, all the retail will blossom, again, and, problem solved. Santa Bab’s DT will be the spit shined amaze ball boho morning glory alexs cantina tony’s pizza it one was. NOT.
At its core, this ‘cash grab’ is all it is for SB. There was some money on a table and SB went after it. Expect as little as possible put into Broke Blue Skies North and a nice chunk of change for the general coffers of SB and HACSB. What happens after 36 months? Any power points for reentry?
No one is inciting violence here. Peaceful protests do not put anyone in harms way. They do make people uncomfortable though. Most people can’t attend Council meetings. So why not go to their home? Makes sense. They are public servants and should expect this when they make decisions like this.
Yes! The city council and mayor are ruining our city. Vote them all OUT
they could have fired up the Armory on Canon Perdido thats been sitting idle for 10+ years.
they’ve totally abandoned downtown, they like to lurk in the nu downtown of Coast Village Road and mingle at Hugette Clarks old pad. Such a joke.
RECALL Murillo, Friedman, Gutierrez and Sneddon! These people are voting for things that make .the City worse not better. (Hart is gone in January.) Rowse and Dominguez did the RIGHT thing and voted NO. We need more people on Council that put Residents FIRST. These joker’s don’t.
AGREED!
Brown Act Violation? That Agenda didn’t give residents enough information about the item. How in the world would residents have known that a commuter parking lot would be removed from the parking system and that 40 tiny homeless trailers with 24/7 security would be located on the property for 3years OR MORE!!?
This entire thread is a moot point. The City has decided, through some non-democratic way, to approve 40 dwellings…FOR FREE! Nothing expected in return from the dwellers. Maybe they can wave to the tourists who will be coming into and leaving the City on Carrillo…
I’d like to see Murillo riding her bicycle to & from work, before she eliminates street parking…..
I would support this if the City promises to start enforcing vagrancy laws throughout the City. If these tiny homes go in, then that should be the end of panhandling on the on/off ramps of the 101. The city should work harder with Caltrans to dismantle the encampments all along both the highway and the Union Pacific easements. All encampments in the city could to be dismantled. I think they did this up in Lompoc in the riverbed.
Slab City 93101
Remember the motion picture Oklahoma? SB needs to consider that kind of land rush. Let’s form a line and at dawn on Thanksgiving Day we can stake out our claims for trailer spaces.
LOCALINSB, There were 2 guys that ran for 4th and 5th district last year that shockingly lost. The mayoral race was another complete shocker. They were common sense people who would not have voted for this or alot of other issues the council agrees on. The council probably has another agenda behind the scenes (political party) driving their decisions and its not on our behalf. Sadly the campaign they ran on was to make Santa Barbara better, to improve downtown, to have more affordable housing, to improve the homeless problem…………etc. The city voted and this is what they voted for !
Thank God for Amazon and the Internet, and downtown Carp. The only reason I’ll ever go into downtown SB is for Jury Duty. Nice job, SB City Council – you’ve ruined it.
The city of Hollywood in Florida has made any kind of sleeping in a public area against the law.
I agree with this 100%; I don’t expect anything for free, and I would me MORE than happy to pay a monthly fee for a lot to safely park in. If you want something, you have to work for it. Period. But that also doesn’t mean that you HAVE to “keep up with the Jonses” and go with the group. I’m a free thinker. I want to sleep in a van. Lets me be very frugal ( I have my laptop, my 3DS XL, clothes, shoes, and my motorcycle and gear. Thats it), allows me to spend a LOT more time than the average person outside, in nature, and I have a lot more time to myself BECAUSE I don’t have all of the added responsibility. And for me, the discomfort of van life relative to house life is worth it. Heck, I don’t even need a shower. Just a lot and a bathroom that’s safe, and pay a monthly fee. That would be enough. Thank you for your comment. “The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.” ~Friedrich Nietzsche
translation please?
X01660 – That’s fine, but how is it that you “don’t even need a shower?” Just curious. As a teacher, I would hope you demonstrate good hygiene.
Read my previous comment; I have a gym membership. Get up in the AM, go work out, then shower and go to work. One of my places of employment also has a shower that is available to the employees. Hygeine is very important, especially in mobile living.
Years ago I knew a couple that worked here in SB and lived 3.5 hours drive away. They slept in a pop up camper parked in a driveway M-F. They showered at the gym. A lot of workplaces have kitchens and showers also. I know it creeps a lot of people out to know these type of people are “out there” because it’s unconventional. But I’ve known more than a handful of people to do variations of this. And they are all quite normal people. With jobs.
X01660 – shouldn’t you be at work, you know…. teaching right now? I hope you’re not posting on Edhat during class.
How about arguing my point instead of reverting to variations on an ad hominem logical fallacy? That would be nice. If you could articulate why my argument and views are incorrect, rather than a snarky remark about being in “class”. Then again, this IS Edhat…
Hahaha seriously? I’m not “arguing” anything. I don’t disagree with your “points.” I was just curious about your shower situation because you mentioned it. It’s not an ad hominem attack to question why a “teacher” is constantly posting and arguing on Edhat during the school day. Why the deflection and anger?
In all fairness, it gets confusing when anonymous people post, since the handles are very similar. To answer your question, I’m not a teacher in a school, but at an educational institute in town. At the moment, I don’t have students, so I’m able to post briefly. No anger; life is too short for that. Just wanting to actually debate the topic, rather than resort to fallacious arguments. I’m good. 🙂
Why not bring back work houses? Sounds like a win-win. Seriously. Everyone knows the trade-offs and productive activity is exchanged for shelter. This current one-way street threatening and demanding everything in exchange for nothing is what does not work.
Since when does anyone have the right to decide who their neighbors are? This is America people! Freedom to live where you want is everyone’s right and part of our liberty, regardless of whether or not they’re poor or mentally ill.
No one said you were inciting violence. But, apparently you haven’t observed what often happens at ‘peaceful’ protests, when a few hotheads show up and things get out of control. People have been hurt during what started out as ‘peaceful protests’. Even ‘under control’, and not violent how many neighbors, along with the elected officials family members should have to suffer having large groups of people disrupt their lives? And, there is likely to be yelling, and/or bullhorns used, causing more discomfort and increase the possibility of people getting angry, and people getting hurt. If you did something others didn’t like at your job, would you really think it proper for them to go to your home and harass you? It isn’t the way to solve anything.
For all of those people talking about “grit”, let me break it down for you; I work 70 hours a week. I get paid $13/hr for 30 hours, $16/hr for 40 hours. So $390 + $640= $1,030 a week, GROSS. Multiply that by (in my case, because of max 401k withdrawings) 82%, and you get about $840 a week take home. Multiply by 4, you get $3,378/mo take home cash. So I pay $1500/mo for an apartment with all the utilites, internet, etc. Leaves what? $1878/mo. $300 for food (not a lot), $300 for vehicle stuff (work at night and across town, so public transport wont work, and bike isn’t quick enough), $200 for entertainment (netflix, amazon, eating out). Ok so that’s how much left? about $900/mo. This doesn’t take into acount any incidentals, nor credit card/student loan debt (I don’t have any), emergencies, etc. So how exactly am I supposed to save for the future and invest with $900/mo, IF I’m lucky and nothing comes up? THAT’s reality, folks. And guess what? Good luck finding a nice place for under $1500 a month. So when I decide to sleep in a car so that I can save my mental health and not be super stressed and living paycheck to paycheck, maybe this breakdown will help put things in perspective for you. And I’m one of the lucky ones makes at least an ok amount of money. Now imagine the service worker working two or 3 part time, minimum wage jobs. think they get benefits? What happens if they have to go to the doctor? Its REAL out there, folks. And ALL of us are one more financial or natural disaster from being in the same spot. empathy and compassion. Goes a LONG way.
Honestly, $200 a month for ‘entertainment’? Cut that to zero and that is where a big savings comes in. Eating out? What’s that?
And I’m not complaining. Especially since I don’t have a rent cost. That $200/mo also includes my cell phone as well as website hosting/vpn/tech subscription costs (I’m also a mobile computer tech. Have been for a decade). And as I also said, I’m lucky. I make a decent amount of money, paid my way through school so I don’t have debt, no credit cards, no kids, and I’m single. Again, all I was saying is that support for the working homeless would be nice. And we’re not looking for a handout. Someone mentioned a lot with a shower and a bathroom where you pay a daily/weekly/monthly fee. I’d pay $300/mo for a lot to park in, no problem! You have pay for services. But forcing people to either pay up or move out is VERY counter to what it means to be a free American. I’m not breaking any laws or hurting anyone. I just don’t wanna pay half my income on a box. I will pay 1/5th my income on a safe lot with my own vehicle.
Wait? Stop saying I’m homeless? I’m literally homeless….. Am I missing something here? I am a person without a permanent residence. That makes me homeless. So what am I supposed to do? You tell me.
And once again, focus on my argument. Can we do that everyone? Stop with the ad hominem and stick to the argument. This is logic 101….
Go back and read everything I wrote. Then every time you responded with stuff like “but you’re not really in the place to be asking”, understand that that is the epitome of an ad hominem argumentative fallacy, then go back and actually respond to the argument to which you made the fallacy. I’m not gonna write out the arguments that I’ve made over multiple posts and days. Reading comprehension is required. No TL;DR’s here. 😉
I lived in a camper for a year while working in a National Park and I used a small camp stove for meals. Library is free for books. Internet comes with my rent. Any music I have was paid for years ago. Sometimes go for years without going to the movies; too expensive and mostly tripe.I do have some old movies on dvd I can watch on my computer. My entertainment comes through spending time outdoors in nature: hiking, running on trails, etc., which is totally free and much more satisfying and relaxing and fulfilling (for me) than man-made ‘entertainment’. I feel badly for people who rely on entertainment that has to be fed to them rather than creating it for themselves, I feel my life is richer for not relying on outside influences. Adventure over consumerism is my preference. Not everyone else’s of course.
X01660 – No, I want you to articulate what “argument” you think we are deviating from. You don’t really seem to understand what “ad hominem” means, either. You seem to keep repeating that term in a way you think discredits what others have to say about your situation. YOU put your living situation on display here, YOU chose your way of life, YOU think there should be “support for working homeless,” such as yourself. We have simply disagreed with some of your positions. An opposing view point, by itself, is NOT an “ad hominem” statement. Insinuating that we are uneducated or that somehow our opinions are “illogical” by saying things like “this is logic 101” on the other hand, does amount to an ad hominem attack. Do you see the difference?
I hope they do get the grant and the little homes are built and people get the help they need it aien’t like these yahoos say it aien’t gonna be a bunch of crooks in those houses it’s going to be people that really want and need help. There are some people in this country that want to do away with the poor and handicapped they have no heart for anyone but their kind and no one else… Of course It would be really friggen boring if we were all the same.
Yes I’m entitled to live where I please but I would not live there. Damn right America is a free country I can live where I please.
so what stops every “area” from becoming high end like malibu? only someone saying it is. class warfare at its core. lets push out the rifraf by making it too hard for them to live here.
Your point of view is EXACTLY what is wrong with America now- You have no GRIT. You just have an entitlement attitude. You could NEVER own a home, because it takes WORK and GRIT to accomplish it. You will settle for whatever is handed to you. What is great about the U.S. is that through HARD WORK and persistence , you CAN do anything and buy a house ANYWHERE- Our system provides you the tools to accomplish that or any other feat- IT JUST TAKES GRIT.
Fitness1 – Cool GOVERNMENT job! 😉
I’d like to see more affordable housing, but build it where the living is inexpensive…Lancaster, Taft, Bakersfield, Maricopa, hell, even Crows Landing (you can google it). Why do we need to provide affordable housing in one of the most expensive places (due to desirability) in the Country?
yeah because so many of the malibu and beverly hills residents really “work hard”. you’re living in a false reality.
the folks without homes are locals. period. just because they don’t have a nice car, a nice home, nice clothes, or even an address, doesn’t make them obsolete in our community. residents or locals? you’re simply separating and segregating more people with that label.
What liberal Seattle learned when they put a concentrated “homeless” shelter into their downtown: The area around the courthouse is surrounded by a homeless shelter and other social service organizations. Multiple assaults, harassment and drugs have been reported to the police in the area near the courthouse. Jurors have taken to asking judges to release them from jury duty and two jurors have been assaulted over the past two months.
“When they come to this courthouse they’re afraid to come in,” said King County Sheriff John Urquhart. “They’re afraid to walk down Third Avenue because what they see.”
They will probably wonder why vagrants are even coming to an area they can’t afford. It is a choice to try and live on the streets of Santa Barbara; not some sort of necessity.
Says it all right there…”They are afraid because of what they see.” Just like all the others they judge others on what they see. Not every homeless, poor, handicapped physically, or mentally ill person is a thug but based on what people see they are none of them are given a chance to prove themselves any different based on what the so called perfectly normal people see…You said it right there.
It is called municipal zoning ordinances that affect where and how you can live. They are the critical part of the compact you enter into when you and everyone chooses where they want to live. There are no rights that do not also include equivalent duties and responsibilities. I suggest you read up on them. before making more unilateral demands on others, who do abide by these express public compacts.
Entitlement? Grit? What does that have to do with it? Perhaps I didn’t state it properly. What I mean is, since when does a homebuyer or future resident have to qualify and be approved by their future neighbors before they purchase their home if it’s not an hoa? That is basically what these homeowners are demanding of their future neighbors. These homeowners sound more like they’re the ones with entitlement issues and lack of grit – and heart! Sorry, but just because you already own a home somewhere does not make you entitled to pick and choose who your new neighbors will be.
LINA24 – Homeless people living in a city-owned facility like this are not the same as “neighbors.” They are transient individuals that the city will pick and place in the area. These aren’t home buyers or renters, they are being placed in a parking lot area with many other people by the city. When the city creates something like this without consulting the surrounding existing residents who WILL be impacted by the placement of people in this facility, then yes, the residents (owners and renters alike) have a reason to be upset or concerned.
Which is really funny because none of thy blessed trust fund Nimbys were crying Foal when the Homeless Shelter was installed on the 800 Block of Cacique Grit my Foot…Grit is bought with their trust funds from mommy and daddy…They have no grit of their own or class for that matter..
Many homeless here in Santa Barbara are not transients. They become homeless because they can’t afford the exorbitant rents. Many are hard working people or students living in their cars because of it. It’s time we get to the root of the problem and start taxing the “passive income” of those investors grossly profiteering off the backs of renters and home buyers, and put that money towards creating truly affordable housing in our community. Truly affordable meaning that someone who works full time earning minimum wage can at least pay for a one bedroom apt. with 1/2 of their income. Those greedy investors are the cause of the growing homeless issues in our current society, so they should have to pay to help fix it!!! This tiny home community is a start. Would you rather have them camped out on your sidewalks? Btw, that’s not a bad idea for them to do to all those protesting and camping out in front of the council members homes and offices.
Many homeless here in Santa Barbara are not transients. They become homeless because they can’t afford the exorbitant rents. Many are hard working people or students (and teachers!) living in their cars because of it. It’s time we get to the root of the problem and start taxing the “passive income” of those investors grossly profiteering off the backs of renters and home buyers, and put that money towards creating truly affordable housing in our community. Truly affordable meaning that someone who works full time earning minimum wage can at least pay for a one bedroom apt. with 1/2 of their income. Those greedy investors are the cause of the growing homeless issues in our current society, so they should have to pay to help fix it!!! This tiny home community is a start. Would you rather have them camped out on your sidewalks? Btw, that’s not a bad idea for them to do to all those protesting and camping out in front of the council members homes and offices.