Whenever I read news of the number of unhoused people on the streets of Portland, Oregon, I am curious to see who or what the author blames. Something or someone is always at fault. Homelessness isn’t a force of nature. It isn’t caused by a drop in barometric pressure. Homelessness is a people problem caused by people’s behaviors and attitudes toward other people.
When attributing blame, the easiest tactic is to blame the unhoused themselves. If only they weren’t so [stupid/ uneducated/ lazy/ addicted/ mental/ belligerent/ uncivilized], they wouldn’t find themselves without a place to live that isn’t a dorm room filled with bunk beds (AKA a shelter). In other words, it’s on them. If they just [got a job/ took a shower/ dressed in clean clothes/ stopped using drugs/ quit pitching their tents in my backyard], they would be able to successfully integrate into polite society like the rest of us.
The corollary to that position is to blame the mental condition of the unhoused. It’s pretty obvious that nobody in their right mind would choose to live in a busted down RV parked on a busy street parked end-to-end with other busted down motorhomes and flat-tired trailers. Like, who would want that? Therefore, it stands to reason anyone living like that must be insane. It’s a logical conclusion. The solution, based on that conclusion, is that we need more mental health services for the unhoused. Because they are all bat-shit crazy. However, when asked if they would be willing to fund increased mental health services, citizens balk. Let the government handle it (but not with our tax dollars), and for sure, no half-way houses in our neighborhoods.
Those with some measure of compassion are willing to consider the idea that the homeless are not to blame for their situation (well, most of the homeless). Instead, these good-hearted folks attribute the homeless problem to a lack of affordable housing. Anyone can look up the stats and discover that in most places in the country, and certainly in Portland, the demand for low-income housing far outstrips the supply. The solution: Build more housing, naturally. Duh. Tenements, housing projects, pack ’em in like sardines (but not in my neighborhood). At least, they will have a place to stash all the crap they previously dumped in the parking strip outside my Inner Eastside bungalow.
Well, but then, you might say, how do we get more housing? We need developers to build that housing. If developers would build more low-income housing, problem solved. But alas, they won’t because they would never be able to recoup the cost of construction. Rents are too damn low, they cry. We’d love to help, but our financial hands are tied by the urban growth boundary, our obligations to our stockholders, and our desire to make ten million dollars in profit this year.
Okay, if the developers won’t step up of their own free will, then maybe they could be enticed by government incentives. It’s not developers’ fault. They have bills to pay and bottom lines to feed. The blame lies with the government for not being willing to subsidize affordable housing. Which government? It doesn’t matter. City, county, state, federal—at every level, elected officials are reluctant to fund low-income housing. There’s no money for that, and besides, local zoning laws don’t allow in-fill construction. Our hands are tied. If only the zoning laws were changed, then maybe we could think about offering builders incentives to build.
Then how do we change the zoning laws? How do we force the government to give developers the financial incentives they need to build more low-income housing?
For the time being, we still live in a representative democracy. The people choose their elected representatives, who presumably carry out the will of their constituents. The elected officals shrug and say, if the constituents don’t want us to vote for zoning law revisions, if the voters don’t want to spend their taxpayer dollars to subsidize the construction of affordable housing, then what can we do? The voters have spoken.
Hey, wait a minute. Aren’t homeless people voters, too? Yeah, but who cares?
The votes that matter are homeowners. The ones who bought, built, or inherited wealth in the form of real estate. Lucky them. Here, I think, is the root cause of the homeless issue. Homeowners don’t want affordable housing in their neighborhoods because it could lower their property values.
I have news for them. How valuable do you think your property is when your neighborhood is occupied by homeless encampments? Do you think that bulldozing them from Mt. Tabor to Montavilla is going to help? It might solve the problem in your parking strip, but the community is interconnected, and I have more news for you: Homeless people get around. They are supremely mobile, much more than you are, Ms. Homeowner. You can’t pack up your belongings and be someplace else in five minutes. You are trapped by your little quarter acre of the American dream. The homeless are like squirrels. You can run them off with poison, but soon they will develop an immunity to your poison, and next thing you know, they’ll be back with their tents leaning against your $5,000 fence.
Mr. Homeowner of the house on the corner, what if I were to tell you that building affordable housing in your community would actually increase your property values? Think about it for a second. If you built affordable housing of various types–single family homes, duplexes, triplexes, small apartment buildings–you would attract people who work in your local hospital, grocery store, nursinghome, or elementary school. These workers would not have to commute from Hillsboro or Gresham, but more to the point, they would become part of the fabric of the community. They would shop locally. They would participate in local civics because they care about the safety and beauty of the neighborhood. There would be less crime.
You would be safer. Your neighborhood would be cared for by residents who care. You might even make new friends, who knows? Even if you live behind a tall fence with your yappy dog, you have to come out sometime. Meet your neighbors. You can all walk your yappy dogs together.
Come on, NIMBYs. Get on board the compassion train. Put your heart and money toward a real solution, instead of blaming everyone else for the homeless problem. YOU are the problem. Join the solution or quit whining. You can’t have it both ways.
And if you aren’t ready to become part of the multicultural magical fabric of a vibrant community, then lobby your elected officials to legalize fentanyl. When it comes to taking out drug addicts, candy is dandy, but fentanyl is a lot quicker. That will take care of the worst of the problem. Then all you have to worry about are the old women in your neighborhood who are living in their cars.