This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
By Marisa Kendall,CalMatters
Gov. Gavin Newsom has a new strategy to eliminate the large, long-standing homeless encampments that have been a thorn in his side throughout his administration: Push cities to make them illegal.
The governor on Monday called on every local government in the state to adopt ordinances that restrict public camping “without delay.” He provided a hypothetical model ordinance that lays out exactly what he’d like to see banned: Camping in one place for more than three nights in a row, building semi-permanent structures such as make-shift shacks on public property, and blocking streets or sidewalks.
“There’s nothing compassionate about letting people die on the streets,” Newsom said in a statement. “Local leaders asked for resources — we delivered the largest state investment in history. They asked for legal clarity — the courts delivered. Now, we’re giving them a model they can put to work immediately, with urgency and with humanity, to resolve encampments and connect people to shelter, housing, and care. The time for inaction is over. There are no more excuses.”
Newsom instructed cities and counties to copy his proposed ordinance or change it as they see fit. Though nothing about Newsom’s Monday missive would force cities to adopt this camping ordinance or any other, last year he threatened to withhold funding from local governments that don’t do enough to remove encampments.
Monday’s push comes with the promise of $3.3 billion to address street homelessness and mental health. That money comes from Proposition 1, a $6.4 billion bond that California voters approved in March to pay for treatment beds and permanent housing. Newsom and other state officials were expected to give more details Monday afternoon.
Newsom also warned cities that they should not prohibit camping at all times across the entire city if no shelter beds are available, and that they should “prioritize shelter and services.” He said cities should store belongings confiscated during encampment sweeps and give their owners a chance to claim them. He suggested cities give encampment residents a 48-hour warning before a sweep.
Newsom’s model ordinance would ban all camping — including sleeping with a sleeping bag or blanket — in one place for three days or nights in a row. Unless a city has enough shelter beds or affordable housing to offer their entire homeless population — which is almost never the case — that means people would be forced to pack up their belongings and move at least 200 feet every three days.
The National Health Care for the Homeless Council has found that encampment sweeps can damage residents’ health, sever their connections to services and set them back on their path toward housing.
Even in cities that have shelter beds available, going to a shelter often requires people to abandon their pets or belongings, or to go without their partner. A CalMatters investigation earlier this year found some shelters throughout California are plagued by violence, poor conditions and little oversight.
Newsom’s call to ban certain homeless encampments is the latest salvo in his ongoing fight against street camping. The push started last summer, after the U.S. Supreme Court in Grants Pass v. Johnson ruled that cities can make it illegal to camp on all public property, even if there is nowhere else for people to go. That decision overturned six years of legal protections for homeless residents in California and other western states, where cities effectively had to make sure shelter was available before cracking down on camps.
A month later, Newsom ordered state agencies to adopt policies to clear encampments on their property, and urged local governments to do the same. Since then, more than two dozen California cities and counties have passed new camping bans, resumed enforcing old bans or made existing ordinances more punitive.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
Also Read
- ‘Shocking’: What Supreme Court ruling on transgender policy means for California students
- SpaceX targeting early Saturday launch from Vandenberg of 25 Starlink satellites; sonic booms possible on Central Coast
- Lockdown at Carpinteria’s Aliso School Lifted After Report of Handgun Turns Out to be False Alarm
- Local Favorite Home Plate Grill in Goleta Announces Permanent Closure
- San Luis Obispo Announces Sweeping Crackdown on St Patrick’s Day Street Parties
BASIC – “I’d like to make it uncomfortable ”
Of course you would. Wishing this on our most vulnerable people, along with whining and complaining about your tax dollars being used on an inclusive (the only word you read in the headline before throwing a tantrum) playground for kids with disabilities, truy shows what you are.
Where did the over $24 Billion in homeless spending go?
Aside from free booze and open air drug use endorsements to homeless?
No significant impact on reducing homeless or help8ng the drug addicted mentally ill.
Wonder why tax payers are frustrated? Because the government misplaces billions while the humanitarian crisis grows.
No one wants people camping in front of their home. Thst is the reason why the only thing Msyor Rowse has done in 12 years at City Hall was to pass an oversized vehicle ban. To prevent homeless from parking in front of his house.
Funny how nothing happens unless the elected official is personally impacted by what everyone else has been complaining about.
There have been reasonable low cost humanitarian solutions offered. But there’s no money in it.
Can’t misplaced billions if private organizations solve the humanitarian crisis.
Spewing fantasy garbage, as usual.
And you are ok with letting homeless settling in and being comfortable setting fires. We differ, big time.
No, BASIC, I’m not ok with homeless encampments, but I sure don’t want to make life any more uncomfortable for them. That’s just cruel. I do support the idea of a voluntary camp ground area that can be policed and monitored for safety, but where do you put something like that?
Where we differ is that I do not wish for more suffering on a group of people who are already living a very hard life. Cruelty to vulnerable groups is something I will never agree with you on.
You probably have no idea what they’re dealing with. Facilitation, enabling, and feeling sorry for homeless folks isn’t a solution. I’m sorry softie, but that’s the truth.
One could also say that a person who has never really done anything entrepreneurial or challenging and has sat in a cubicle without ever occupying a leadership position in their entire lives, but rather coasts on an easy paycheck while delivering minimal value is a true “softie.”
100% wrong, as usual. You couldn’t be more off, Bluey. But I’ve told you that so many times before and you still can’t get past your fantasy version of who I am. Keep imagining!
This article STILL skates around the biggest issue with homelessness which has been a truth completely and intentionally ignored by democratic politicians throughout the state at all levels. Homeless people will NOT willingly leave the streets when drugs, alcohol, and sleeping in public are legal (only) for this class of people. Our city has abundant public and non profit resources for people to get the help they need (including beds and food). This article implies that the main problem with shelters is that they cause separation from pets, partners, and belongings. ARE YOU KIDING?? I’m sure this happens sometimes, but 99% of the time they don’t want to get help because they are not allowed to bring/use drugs and alcohol into a shelter and the government fails to acknowledge, let alone address, this underlying issue of addiction and the availability of fentanyl, etc.
Don’t forget in cities like SF they were providing free booze to homeless.
And drug clinics with free needles, etc….
Why would they leave the streets?
Again spewing garbage from the con bubble fantasy bubble.
What a frickin’ mess. Gavin is pivoting back and forth on this issue and it makes him look like a slimy snake always looking for votes, which is what some of us already realized years ago he is. The thing is he brought this on himself – the homeless issue. American citizens will see the CA Newsom years as a big time fail on this issue if he should ever entertain the idea of running for anything outside of this state.
Basic, Comparing Newsom to a snake insults the snake. Just sayin’
How did he “bring this on himself”? You make it sound like he created the problem, but there have been homeless people in CA ever since it was a state. He’s obligated to at least try and solve problems, but this problem literally has no solution. There are dozens and dozens of reasons why people don’t live in permanent housing, but only one way to increase permanent housing, and that’s by building more. All other simplistic solutions will fail, guaranteed. But no one agrees where to build, and no one wants to pay for it because they think unhoused people don’t deserve or want the help. People who sit in their houses and blame one guy for the homeless problem in CA are acting like simpletons.
Completely agree that there are many reasons for why people do not live in permanent housing. A prime one, underlining all others, is that housing is not affordable, whether it’s renting a room or a cottage or an apartment if you have no money. And coastal California is the most expensive place of all the west coast towns and cities. And some, as SB City, are built out, unless all the zoning, that which has made the city an attractive, destination place, is eliminated. …The State of California, led by Bay Area legislators, with the tacit agreement by abstaining, is pushing hard to do this, although the housing that is being built will not be $-accessible to the homeless or many of the very low-incomed.
Homelessness is a national problem. Why aren’t there national answers, solutions? …uh, the answer to that is that the majority voted as they did.
BIRD – just to clarify – the majority of voters did not vote for Trump.
It should never have gone this far.
Not just regarding this issue, but multi-millionaire politicians need to surround themselves with regular folks before making decisions, Money can be a drug, and anesthetic, itself.
If homeless camps are forced to move every three days we will simply have traveling messes instead of one mess. Why not find an open area, make it available for camping then police it?
The homeless won’t stay in that area and cannot be forced to do so. And where would you place it? No one wants a giant ongoing homeless “village” near them, or even to look at driving by.
Basic, You’re probably correct. But if many refuse to go to shelters (because of drug/alcohol restrictions or whatever) what is our alternative? This three day proposal just means a moving camp show all over the town…
I’d like to make it uncomfortable and have a centralized location for them to have to start over and deal with their s***. But I seriously doubt the ACLU et al. would be ok with that!
The long ruling party in charge has literally turned California from the jewel of the nation to the armpit of the nation. There is no fix at this point as long as we keep voting in liberal pacifist.
DAVID – what does being a pacifist have to do with it? Should we elect a violent Republican to wage war on poor people?
Many of us have had immediate family members who live/lived on the streets for any number of reasons. None of those reasons included a healthy lifestyle, mental stability, and/or self control. If you have been involved in any sort of intervention with them, you know that it’s nearly impossible to MAKE them do anything. Providing direct monetary support almost always translates into their ability to buy more booze/weed/drugs/mouthwash (containing alcohol)/piercings/tatts/etc. The heartache that comes when a loved one dies alone under a freeway overpass, bushes, sidewalks is unimaginable. My family member was found after several days still clutching a baggie that contained some fentanyl pills disguised as oxycodone…in the other hand was a “Rambo” knife (for protecting their stash). These tragic stories will continue until a law is put into place where people can be legally identified as unable to care for themselves and forced into rehab and long-term treatment. Unfortunately, the problem is getting worse, not only in the larger cities, but in much smaller places as well.
The reason it’s getting worse is because more & more people are financially precarious. I mean I guess I appreciate the assed/2 attempt at compassion, but sometimes it’s just about money, as in ‘don’t have enough for rent’. When rents keep going up, people with stable but low incomes become unable to pay and it’s not because of bad habits or mental illness. LOTS of homeless people have jobs! Medical bankruptcy has put people on the street, too. So when you say “any number of reasons”, many of those reasons have nothin to do with your UNcomprehensive list (holy hell, dude: tats & piercings??? go back to sleep), and yes, hell yes helping out financially can make a HUGE difference to them.
If you’re “financially-precarious” as you say, don’t you think one of the most expensive places to live in the COUNTRY is a bad choice for you?
Everything is so simple to you, isn’t it? I’m almost envious of the ignorance-induced bliss out of which you seem to operate.
Simpletons know no stress or worry. Well, unless their couches catch fire.
The Homeless flock here because our weather is more conducive to living outside.
No, they don’t.
These articles all cite the same 2023 study
https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/06/22/how-many-of-californias-homeless-residents-are-from-out-of-state/
https://www.businessinsider.com/california-homelessness-crisis-homegrown-unhoused-are-californians-2023-6
https://calmatters.org/housing/homelessness/2024/07/california-homelessness-myths/
Lots more stats here:
https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/Homelessness%20in%20CA%202023%20Numbers%20-%201.2024.pdf
Your Governor is an opportunistic grease spot! He should have been building mental hospitals and rehabilitation centers and forced the homeless into them years ago. Instead he read the ‘compassion’ of the public as a reason to let the problem fester and now wants to do something because it is a stain on his long term ambition.
In NYC, the mayor removed them in a week. Into shelters, which they had enough of, or into jail. That was the choice, and into the shelters they went. Newsom did not care they were dying in the street for quite some time now. This despicable human being will NEVER be President!
In New York City:
In recent years, homelessness in New York City has reached the highest level since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
In February 2025, 114,791 people slept each night in NYC shelters. Thousands more (there is no reliable number, as the annual HOPE estimate is deeply flawed) slept unsheltered in public spaces, and more than 200,000 people slept temporarily doubled-up in the homes of others. Thus, it can be estimated that more than 350,000 people were without homes in NYC in February 2025.
In February 2025, 70 percent of those in shelters were members of homeless families, including 39,394 children. That month, 34,550 single adults slept in shelters. Thirty-nine percent of those in shelters, or 46,418 individuals, were New Arrivals.*
More than 146,000 NYC schoolchildren experienced homelessness at some point during the 2023–2024 school year, representing one in eight children attending city schools.
The primary reason people in NYC become homeless is the lack of affordable housing. Surveys of homeless families have identified the following major immediate, triggering causes of homelessness in NYC: eviction; doubled-up or severely overcrowded housing; domestic violence; job loss; and hazardous housing conditions.
Between 1996 and 2017, NYC lost 1.1 million units of affordable housing. The most recent Housing Vacancy Survey indicates a vacancy rate of less than one percent for affordable apartments in NYC.
Families entering shelters (excluding New Arrivals) predominantly come from a few clustered zip codes in the poorest neighborhoods in NYC. However, every community district in NYC contributes to the ongoing homelessness crisis.
Compared to homeless families, homeless single adults have higher rates of serious mental illness, substance use disorders, and other severe health problems. There is not yet reliable data on such rates New Arrivals in the shelter system.
Of the longer-term New Yorkers (non-New Arrivals) sleeping in the DHS shelters, 43 percent of families with children, 65 percent of single adults, and 75 percent of families without minor children have a disability requiring a facility-related accommodation.
The majority of unsheltered homeless individuals are people living with a mental illness or other severe health problems.
Black and Hispanic/Latinx New Yorkers are disproportionately affected by homelessness. Approximately 56 percent of heads of household in shelters are Black, 32 percent are Hispanic/Latinx, 7 percent are White, less than 1 percent are Asian-American or Native American, and 4 percent are of unknown race/ethnicity. Demographic info on asylum seekers and other new arrivals in shelters has not been provided by the City.
In City Fiscal Year 2023, the average length of stay in the DHS shelter system was 412 days for single adults, 437 days for families with children, and 750 days for adult families.
New York’s legal Right to Shelter has given more than one million homeless New Yorkers a way off the streets since 1981.
Sources:
https://www.coalitionforthehomeless.org/basic-facts-about-homelessness-new-york-city/
No doubt. New York City is an EXTREMELY expensive place to live. Basically top 5 on this planet. So, libs – ask yourself what’s the problem with what you’ve been supporting – folks living in very expensive cities that need more and more money to support them where THEY choose to live AND not work at the same time. Hmm….
I’m thinking “BI” is agreeing with “Chuff’s™” “Your Governor… ” comment, or something like that? It’s getting pretty hard follow sometimes!
Could be, he’s (or she, still can’t trust anything it says) not very good at threading comments. Also pretty likely since those 2 crybabies hate everyone not born like them.
Many do work and still can’t afford rent.
The Rube and the Chalfwit are full of concepts worthy of the bigot-in-chief.
The City of SB can build housing for the homeless in all of the empty lots off of Hollister near the drive-in theater (Lopez/Botello/Love). There is a lot of empty real estate in that area and it’s cheap as the city already owns those properties. Such a facility would go a long way to remedy our local homeless population. The City of Goleta might consider chipping in a few bucks to help out with such a project. Forcing people to move every three days is nonsense and impractical. For those with mental/physical/addiction issues, there could be separate living accommodations where they’d have support for their issues.
That wouldn’t be welcomed by us Goletans, to say the least. No thank you. Find some spots in SB for the SB unhoused people. Plus downtown has way more cops and other resources to handle all the issues.
BASIC – “Us Goletans?” Dude, if anything, you’re a transplant. You grew up in Montecito. And no, you’re wrong. Not all of us Goletans would oppose this, so please dont speak for us. Talk about a NIMBY.
A housing facility for the homeless in a non-residential area far from homes, schools and shopping is not that objectionable. It actually makes some sense. Where would you suggest in downtown? I mean you’re constantly whining about the homeless downtown and now you want to keep them there?
Once again, complaining about EVERY. SINGLE. TOPIC. whether you agree with it or not. NIMBYism at its best.
“No! Nothing I don’t like, which is everything I’ve ever heard of, within miles of where I might be pretending to live, depending on the topic at hand!”
So go ahead and poll all the local Goletans that grew up here then, and report back to us. Let’s see if they like your idea of housing all of SB’s homeless here like you do. What’s the word for that buzzer thing that goes off when you lost? lol….
BASIC – How have I lost? You are saying you polled “all the local Goletans” already?
And no, not housing “all of SB’s homeless,” just providing a housing facility for those it can accomodate.
Stop lying and making up scenarios that don’t exist and them claim “victory” over your fantasies.
You’re losing the very minimal grasp you had on reality.
Go home, Cito rat.
I wouldn’t get all caught up in the “you’re a transplant” or you came from LA, New York, or Chicago. When it comes to the community, we are all part of it no matter if we are from Goleta, SB, or Montecito. Another possibility would be for SB to donate one or more of the “airport” properties to the City of Goleta. Goleta could then develop world-class homeless housing and care facilities for those with drug/alcohol/mental issues. The City of Goleta could also, on their own, develop these much-needed facilities, which would benefit SB as well. Goleta has a couple of parcels between Santa Barbara Shores and the Sandpiper Golf Course. It’s just sitting there and could be used to help these folks.
BEES …… 🤦♂️
I was agreeing with you dude. I was not “caught up” in anything other than pointing another one of Doc NIMBY’s lies. I should have known better than to support your opinion.
Since moving to the area in the 90s, I personally have experienced the “I was BORN and RAISED in Santa Barbara” better-than-you attitude. Which to ME, in MY opinion, how I look at it, from MY standpoint, comes across as a bit territorial. Imagine not having the ability to comment on anything if you weren’t born and raised here. Appears that I am the one who got “caught up” in this.
Yup, sure sounds like you did get too wrapped up in that.
Point is, BASIC doesn’t speak for all “us Goletans,” whether he thinks so or not.
“In this case, McCune’s financial support for DignityMoves didn’t come from the McCune Foundation but directly from McCune herself with a $50,000 gift for the Santa Barbara Street Village in 2022; another gift of $500,000 for La Posada Village in 2023; and a more recent donation of $1 million for the future Family Village, all in the greater Santa Barbara area.”
https://www.noozhawk.com/sara-miller-mccunes-1-5-million-donation-dignitymoves-sparks-giving/
That area of Goleta/SB does seem to be an appropriate place for another DignityMoves village.
(Ah, Sonatch on Botello Rd., my first full-time job!)