The primitive settlement sits in the shadow of the state capitol and is home to about 300 people who have no toilets or running water, creating unsanitary conditions that advocacy groups worry could promote diseases like cholera. With the downturn in the economy and more working-class people losing their jobs and their homes, the tent city is expanding.
The mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson, said in an interview that he wants to create a permanent tent city for the homeless, although he is not sure where it should be. He said he recognized that doing so would be difficult politically. But he said a permanent site could bring sanitation services and regulations like a ban on drugs and alcohol.
Mr. Johnson said that the rise in homelessness was a regional problem, and that surrounding localities should help pay for any solution, like establishing a permanent tent city. He will also have access to $2.3 million that President Obama’s stimulus package is giving Sacramento to deal with homeless issues.
“We’ve tried to sweep the homeless under the rug and it’s been our dirty little secret for far too long,” said the mayor, who took office three months ago and whose status as a former Phoenix Suns basketball star has helped attract media attention to the tent city. “We’ve been relying on good Samaritans and nonprofits, but they’re overwhelmed now.”
Sacramento has been particularly hard hit by the economic crisis. Now, any decent-sized city has a homeless population, and sometimes a considerable (and chronic one). However, what's happening now is that the population's being swelled by formerly working class people. That is, they were paying their bills, taking care of their kids, contributing to the economy, etc. Now they're facing cholera outbreaks.
For the record: 10.4 percent of rental housing units in Sacramento are vacant, along with 4.8 percent of owned units. Both are higher than the national average. However, being a mere city government, Sacramento can't move to put people in that housing. Anyone want to lay odd on how long it will take for someone (or some movement) to propose that it have that ability? A law only lasts so long as there's some consensus behind it. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a rise in communitarian ideologies or a serious squatter's movement in this country.
I've been covering the homeless issue for about the last three years in Asheville and some of this aligns completely with what I've seen. Ironically enough, efforts to reduce the numbers of chronically homeless (formerly the biggest part of the problem) seem to have had some measure of success, but the overall numbers are still rising as their ranks are swelled by the formerly employed. Charities and nonprofits that provide "last gap" services like helping the poor pay their rent or keep their power on (so they don't become homeless in the first place) are stretched to the limit.
One observation though: the official homeless count for Sacramento (pop. 460,000) is 1,226. The official count in Asheville (pop. 74,000) is 555. Either the numbers are off or, per capita, Asheville really does have a frickin' ton of homeless people.
call me confused by the whole thing, but by buying up the (cleverly framed) toxic 'assets', does the US Govt get those houses too?
the flip-side being, are you following the 'militants' that are just plain refusing to leave their homes, and the growing number of sheriffs that are refusing to evict them
no sane govt wants a growing number of pissed-off citizens camped off the edge of their city..
Posted by: m1k3y | March 23, 2009 at 06:25 PM
I'm fairly confused too, but my guess is that they just get the financial assets (bad loans, etc.) tied to the homes, not the properties themselves.
Yes, I've been following them to some degree, and that will have its own post in the future.
You're right, no sane government does. A thousand angry people are an army waiting to happen.
Posted by: David Forbes | March 24, 2009 at 02:35 PM