Does Encinitas really need a homeless shelter?

Tucked away in The Coast News’ Feb. 24 print edition is a public meeting notice placed by the city of Encinitas to discuss “homeless prevention and shelter” at 6 p.m. on March 15 during the Encinitas City Council meeting.

Why would Encinitas want to host a regional homeless shelter when Oceanside and Carlsbad already have sizable shelters?

Are homeless shelters going to be like Starbucks along the coast, where every town gets one (and all that comes with it), regardless if they need or want it?

our streets?

What happens when there are not enough shelter beds and the shelter must keep expanding to “house” yet more homeless?

And what will the city do with people who refuse to stay in a shelter and opt for a life on the streets — the very justification for the shelter in the first place?

Have we grown the homeless population in Encinitas? What happened to the homeless hotels operated during COVID-19? What were the results of that experiment?

All these questions and more, including the results laws discourage or prevent most standard enforcement techniques cities have historically used to mitigate the practice of living on the streets.

“The result: People from all over the country — and the world, actually — come here specifically to be homeless. California’s population accounts for 12% of the U.S. total of 334 million, but the state hosts 51% of the homeless.”

This has nothing to do with compassion and everything with protecting Encinitas and its residents from the well-documented ills of other cities related to home-

Oakland Democratic state Sen. Nancy Skinner added that “I think everyone in the Legislature would not want to have any funding shift, for example, for a public service like transit.”

But a look at the numbers gives a pretty good idea why Newsom chose transit for about 10% of the cuts needed to make up a predicted $22 billion deficit.

They show Californians are not as enthusiastic about either light or heavy rail commuting as their elected lawmakers.

Figures from the American Public Transit Association demonstrate that neither the extensive Bay Area Rapid Transit system nor Southern California’s Metro Rail have come close to recovering the ridership they lost during the coronavirus pandemic, when two things happened: fends folks like Wiener and Skinner for other reasons, even though they rarely mention it.

One saw many white-collar workers begin staying home to work. The other was that thousands of commuters daily chose to use private cars rather than public transit to avoid possible exposure to the many, ever mutating variants of COVID-19.

By the fall of last year, BART was carrying just 55% of its pre-pandemic passenger load, while Metro Rail was at 71% of prior ridership. Partly, that’s because San Francisco saw a greater shift than Southern California toward remote work. The change also saw that city lose about 6% of its population, many workers moving to less expensive areas once they no longer needed to live close to their job sites.

Wiener, in particular, has been the legislative point person for the recent spate of state laws that encourage far denser housing than California has previously seen.

Proximity to mass transit lines and stations is written into some of those measures, with high-rise construction permitted almost automatically in areas close to “major transit corridors” and light rail stations.

So the more new rail lines are built, the more dense housing will be permitted over the next few years.

The fact that not very much of the development authorized so far has actually taken place has less to do with transit access than with high interest rates and skepticism on the part of lenders. They see high vacancy rates where new construction has risen. Current vacancy rates in commercial and multi-family housing run about 27% in San Francisco and 20% in Los Angeles.

In short, just because legislators authorize something does not mean it will automatically occur, especially when the average cost of creating a new one-bedroom apartment or condominium reportedly is about $830,000.

None of this will dampen the enthusiasm of Wiener, Skinner and other legislators for ever-denser housing.

As a result, and if transit ridership gradually creeps back toward pre-pandemic levels, expect pushback from the lawmakers over the cut in transit construction funding, putatively slashed by Newsom from $7.7 billion in 2022-23 to $5.7 billion in 2023-24.

As Coronado Mayor Richard Bailey succinctly put it, “There are two kinds of homeless people, those who want help and those that do not.”

Do homeless shelters actually help people stop abusing drugs and alcohol, get back on their feet to obtain employment and permanent housing?

How will a homeless shelter in our town impact public safety when these residents leave the shelter to loiter on our streets?

How will a shelter reduce the number of homeless on of the recent Point in Time Count, need to be asked, fully analyzed and publicly vetted before Encinitas considers opening a homeless shelter.

El Cajon Mayor Bill Wells recently stated in a news article:

“The truth is, California is unique in the nation in that it has crafted a network of laws and policies that are so permissive they actually encourage homelessness,” Wells said. “Meanwhile, generous social benefits enable a lifestyle of addiction, even as ill-conceived lessness, including endless spending, more failed policies and an ever-expanding homeless population.

With over $13 billion taxpayer dollars spent on homelessness to date in California and few successful outcomes, Encinitas voters need to be watchful and involved in the conversation and decision making.

Cannabis dens and homeless shelters don’t make the best of neighbors. Or do they?

Elena Thompson Encinitas

The specific numbers, available most recently from last July, August and September, saw both systems carrying tens of thousands more persons in those months of 2022 than a year earlier. But still not nearly enough to make either system break even financially.

That’s one reason the Newsom budget proposal seeks to cut much more money for new lines and equipment than for operations.

But any reduction in new rail construction of-

For the fiscally conservative governor had to find places to cut his budget that would impact the fewest possible Californians.

Since ground has not even been broken yet on rail lines that were to be financed by the funds at issue, let alone have them in operation, this is a cut that affects no one right now.

Which makes it a logical category to reduce, unless there’s a sudden and unexpected upturn in the state’s finances.