By David Sirkin, M.D. Santa Monica
I would like to respond to Mathew Millen’s letter (SMDP, Jan. 9, page 4), which commented on my opinion piece: “Give them shelter, not leave them in the streets.”
I wrote that we need to have a large emergency shelter near downtown Santa Monica if police are to be able to enforce existing and future ordinances forbidding sleeping overnight in our streets and parks. Millen replied that Samoshel, an Olympic Boulevard homeless shelter, run by Ocean Park Community Center, is such a shelter. However, persons working or living in that shelter told me that all the beds there are reserved for up to six months, and there is a waiting list to get in.
That is not my idea of an emergency shelter. An emergency shelter is a place where, in case of a true emergency, such as an approaching stampede of buffalo, or a storm resembling an arctic blizzard, all persons who have no other shelter for the night are welcome, no matter how late they arrive. No one is turned away. They all squeeze in somehow, even if there are not enough cots or mattresses for all of them.
We need a changed mindset, which then could lead fairly easily to a Santa Monica that looks like this in the near future: A person bedding down for the night in the park or on the sidewalk is not an every-day event; it is an emergency, even if there is no approaching herd of buffalo or arctic storm. This person has nowhere to sleep. He is not going to sleep outside tonight in our city. No how, no way. The ordinances against it are strictly enforced by a group of dedicated and determined police officers. He had better go to the emergency shelter, because if he is caught bedding down outside again, the police will take him to jail or to a hospital. The emergency shelter is an essential element of this scenario. The police cannot reasonably make someone leave the park or the sidewalk if there is no place for him to go.
Millen says that many homeless persons do not want to avail themselves of shelters or assistance programs. He is also concerned that building more shelters here will make Santa Monica more of a magnet for the homeless than it is currently. I would like to address these points together.
I agree that probably many homeless persons do not want to be “tied down” to appointments with agencies that might help them, and prefer sleeping under the stars to staying in a shelter, particularly if the shelter is crowded. Those with significant mental illness may avoid shelters because they are uncomfortable being around other people. For this reason, a large emergency shelter, if combined with an expanded detail of police who would make it difficult for homeless persons to sleep outdoors in Santa Monica, might actually be a repellent rather than a magnet for many homeless persons.
As Frank Burton explained in his letter (SMDP, Jan. 4, page 4), the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1975 decision forbidding the placing of a mentally ill person in a hospital against his will if he can survive outside one has resulted in a sizable number of mentally ill persons being free to be homeless, which is not a satisfactory result.
Santa Monica and other cities, however, do not have to allow the mentally ill or anyone else to sleep in their parks and streets, or on their beaches. On this I agree with the Daily Press’ editorial, “Make the homeless uncomfortable” (SMDP, Oct. 28, page 5). If cities are vigilant in stopping people from sleeping outdoors, then more of those suffering from substance dependence and other mental illness will accept treatment, as well as housing and income assistance. They will learn that they must have incomes in order to have the kind of freedom they want, unless they want to live as survivalists in wilderness areas.
Millen is also concerned about the costs of a new shelter and an expanded detail of police for the homeless. He does not feel that Santa Monica’s low-income tenants, in particular, should have to bear the costs. I could not agree more. Surely, for the portion of funding that would need to be raised locally, our city government could find a way to make a tax increase that would not affect low-income residents.
Our city includes 90402, which according to a Forbes’ Web site is the most expensive residential zip code in LA County and the 12th most expensive in the nation. We also have many high-end shops, restaurants, hotels and beach clubs. A progressive tax increase would affect mainly our wealthiest residents and businesses. To twist George Bush, Sr.’s words, we have the wallet; now we just need the will.
The data recently released by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority indicate that Los Angeles County has about 90,000 homeless persons, prompting Mayor Villaraigosa to declare, “This is the capital of homelessness in America.” For whatever reason, we do seem to have more than our fair share of homeless persons here in Southern California.
Santa Monica may have to pay more for homeless services than most other cities in the nation do, but we can comfort ourselves by remembering that we pay less for heating and air-conditioning, due to our mild climate.
If we ask the wealthier members of our community to pay more for programs and facilities addressing homelessness, we also can remind them that reducing the blight of homeless persons and their filth on our streets and parks will make the city more attractive to residents and to the visitors on whom businesses depend, in addition to helping ultimately the homeless themselves.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 24, 2006. Read the original PDF.