The data don't lie - about two-thirds or over 60% of homeless substance abusers who get housed and treated return to gainful employment and stability within a few years. What about the people who are homeless because they were forclosed on or were one paycheck away from not making rent like many millions of people - what about them? How are we to hold them accountable for their actions? I observed first hand 'skid row' in Los Angeles - the culmination of years of not dealing adequately with the issue - it is a regional issue but we are the 800 lb gorrilla whether we like it or not and if we don't step up - how will other cities in our region learn? We must set the example and suck it up and spend a little to save a lot in emergency health care and increased law enforcement costs.

Oh here we go...give me a break... Sandronsky.

You are a self proclaimed "social justice radical" and I suspect, given your well known resume that you are a card carrying member of the Communist Party. I am pretty sure that it does not matter to you that most of them are on drugs or are alcoholics...I have no doubt you think it is their RIGHT to be provided with free housing and food even if they are chemically dependent regardless of their lifestyles and poor choices made that preceded their homelessness. I also suspect that you are against substance abuse testing in order for them to receive free housing, food and services from the taxpayers or community based organizations.

Unlike you, and those with radical Leftist leanings, I believe that social responsibility is a two way street.

Do your own research, I have, and I have been involved with homeless issues personally for 20 years, I know my assertions to be a fact, through empirical evidence and academic research.

You can research this for yourself Seth, Google: "homelessness substance abuse"

I have plenty of video I took myself on the subject interviewing the homeless, it's on Youtube... go ask the homeless yourself, see if they think the vast majority have substance abuse problems... or go visit Loaves & Fishes and ask around.

Jennifer can you give us more info on "Safe Ground"?

Tom, I do not believe the conclusions in Street Count. The Street Count was based on facilitated "self reporting". Where you aware Tom that the homeless and..um...yeah...most anyone with a substance abuse problem, either lie about their problem, or really don't think they have a problem?

Somewhat of a good point, Jim. But since 48% were reported, that, alone, disproves your "most anyone" would lie about their problem! I live in Homeless World Sacramento and think that 'about half' is in the realm of the truth on the topic., but I don't know exactly, and people, themselves, don't know 'exactly' when they've crossed the boundry into addiction.

BUT the problem I really have with what you're saying, Jim, has to do with this hatred I perceive in your comments, here. YES, addicted people should strive to overcome their addictions. But Homeless World is where you end up when the world has become a horribly unhappy place and one's relationships have fallen apart. The addicted here are knowingly on a path of suicide and need intervention. I GREATLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT THEY DO NOT NEED LOAVES&FISHES ENABLING [or, as I insist it should be called "ENTRAPPING"] POLICIES.

Tom I have no hatered towards the homeless whatsoerver. For me it is impossible to see a homeless person and not feel their plight. While I have never had a substance abuse problem, I have been in their shoes.

I think the only thing we disagree on is the extent of the homeless who have substance abuse problems.

The real issue is funding and support for pragmatic programs that will help those who want help, who are willing to be personally reponsible in finding a path back to a fully engaged life.

I've never heard or read anything that a non-profit said or wrote about itself that didn't report its operation was the greatest thing since sliced bread. More than reading more blather from L&F, I suggest that people go the Secretary of State and read the CT2 report which all non-profits are supposed to file annually. That is the real story, but their operational shenanigans are so convoluted and confusing that it takes both an attorney and an auditor to find that real story.

Excuse me for plugging my blog, but I am beholding to no one or organization or thing other than the truth of things [which I, arrogantly, hope to find.] Safe Ground is a topic these days in the Sacramento Homeless blog.

sacramentohomeless.blogspot.com

I agree about the City's failures. To that all I can say is this, Sacramento deserves the City Council we have. If those who live in our community fail to hold them accountable, it is our fault not theirs.

This is not brain surgery, and everyone knows this....y'all continue to vote the way that you do...If we elect candidates who are supported by wealthy and powerful special interest groups, they will in turn ALWAYS vote in their benefactors favor.

The problem is that most voters are lazy, they follow the slick marketing campaigns or follow a party like drones instead of doing their own research as to who is behind a candidate.

I disagree with your overall assertion that we need to provide homes before we expect them to become clean & sober. It can be done simultaneously, and as a condition of receiving help. I differ in philosophy than most who want to help the homeless. I do not believe that free housing is a basic human right. As I said above, social responsibility is a two way street. That being said, I believe we have an obligation to provide transitional housing and a hand up for those who are willing to be responsible and active in their own recovery and need help reentering mainstream society. At the same time, we cannot provide so many services that it actually encourages more homeless to migrate to Sacramento.

As for the mentally ill, we have many existing programs available, including SSI, subsidized housing, food stamps and free medical care. We also have board and care facilities and in extreme cases for those who cannot care for themselves, we have state institutions. I know the liberals will always scream we are not doing enough about the mentally ill, I gave up on this issue many years ago, for liberals there is never enough government help...that also goes for any issue they feel strongly about.

One issue that the liberals also completely ignore is that we spend $7-12 Billion dollars a year in California (depending on what numbers you want to believe) on providing free services for illegal aliens. Our homeless directly compete with these illegal aliens for social services, low income housing, food stamps and medical care. Until the issue of illegal aliens is addresses, liberals have no right to complain that we do not spend enough to help the homeless.

Homeless providers' way of "helping" homeless" is antiquated and a proven failure for years. A big part of that is because they don't expect the homeless to succeed in helping themselves to find their way back as productive members of society. In fact, there is a financial disincentive for the providers when the homeless do succeed. They are paid for failures and penalized for successes.

Yes, many drug and alcohol addicts can be helped but they must make the decision to do so and that is extremely difficult for each one to do, so the percentage of those that fail is very very high. Many have to repeat trying over and over. Bottom line is that if an addict can see nothing better in their future than an escape through drugs and/or alcohol, then what is the motivation to get or remain "clean and sober?"

I am generally in agreement with what you write, savemidtown. But I am dubious on how cost-effective these very very expensive sounding programs can be. A lot of savings can be seen from stopping law enforcement from focussing on 'warehousing the rabble' instead of chasing real crime, including white-collar crime (which is the almost-sole cause of the economic calamity we're in, btw.)

I'm on your side in all this, savemidtown, but I would wager a lot could be done far short of the expense of providing housing for everyone. People need pathways out of destitution. We don't have even THAT, yet. Destitute people need places to keep their things; reliable homeless-help organizations that HELP them to "get their day on," need to come into existence in place of those that destoy people's days, at whim. And an Outreach Program [like what VOA had, but was the first to get 86ed in the bad economy] is needed such that there is a Wolf out there [you know, like the Wolf character in Pulp Fiction] who comes on the scene and fixes lives, individually.

Some people just need to be reconciled to their families. Some people need legal help that is unavailable. Some people just need a boost, or dream, or some hope, or a job, or a clean pair of underwear. Many people with mental health problems are dumped on the streets rather than society doing its duty to save them.