A Law was approved in California to improve dangerous shelters for the homeless. Counties and cities are ignoring it

Californians who are homeless must now decide whether to try to get into a shelter or risk going to jail after the Supreme Court gave communities broader authority to forbid camping outside.

The world that awaits those who are successful in finding a shelter bed is full of stories about health risks, violence, theft, and a lack of accountability. According to public information that CalMatters was able to get, the majority of counties and towns appear to have disregarded a recent state law that attempted to improve hazardous conditions in shelters.

The state Legislature established a new system in 2021 in response to previous reports of flooding, sexual harassment, and maggots in shelters. Under this new system, local governments are required to inspect the shelters following complaints and submit yearly reports on shelter conditions, along with plans to address any safety or building code violations.

Only five of California’s 58 counties—Lake, Los Angeles, Monterey, Orange, and Yuba—have reported shelters, according to CalMatters. According to documents from the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the organization in responsibility of carrying out the rule, only four of the state’s four hundred and seventy-eight communities submitted reports: Fairfield, Petaluma, Santa Rosa, and Woodland.

Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva, a Democrat who represents portions of Orange and Los Angeles counties, said of the law’s author, “It is shocking, number one, that there is so little reporting, considering that is part of the legislation.” “Here, we are requesting the necessities.”

She noted that she has asked to meet with representatives of the state housing agency in light of the results published by CalMatters. Quirk-Silva promised to take audits and other necessary actions into consideration.

“Perhaps we should get more teeth,” she remarked. “It is very possible that we will pursue additional legislation in the future.”

A hint of what’s missing as a result of the failure to report is provided by police call logs, shelter incident reports, and other records obtained by CalMatters: a child who fell out of an unreinforced window in San Mateo County and was hospitalized; numerous allegations of sexual harassment in Contra Costa County; shortages of food in Placer County; and deaths, mold, and vermin in numerous locations throughout the state.

Legislative records indicate that, since 2018, California has funded at least $1.5 billion on shelters and related solutions, on top of millions contributed by local governments, counties, and the federal government. The facilities are intended to be a stopgap measure before finding permanent housing, but they are increasingly serving as a bridge to nowhere. According to federal data, the state added 27,544 emergency shelter beds between 2018 and 2023—roughly five times the rate of permanent housing with supportive services.

Most of what takes place in such shelters is mysterious. Officials told CalMatters that no state agency maintains an up-to-date inventory of the number and locations of shelters in operation. Shelters are not subject to a state licensing procedure. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development maintains records on the quantity of emergency shelter beds and the duration of stays, but it does not keep track of resident fatalities, health, or safety.

Although there aren’t shelters for the homeless in every county or city in California, state housing officials projected that there would be about 1,300 shelters overall in 2021. Despite the fact that experts emphasize that other options, such direct rent subsidies or housing with on-site services, are frequently more effective at addressing the underlying problem, municipalities continue to invest in them as a more immediate alternative to street homelessness.

It’s not a smart concept. Congregate shelters are home to a large number of homeless persons at the same time, according to Eve Garrow, a senior policy analyst and ACLU of Southern California campaigner. “We want to move away from that model, but we also want to make sure those spaces are safe and clean for as long as people need them.”

By establishing a new state monitoring structure, the 2021 state law was intended to assist in enforcing basic building and safety standards for shelters. The law mandates that towns or counties check the shelters and report any infractions to the state so that future financing be reconsidered when individuals sleeping at the shelters or their advocates register complaints. The hitch is that counties and cities only need to notify the state if they think a violation is serious enough.

According to Mitchel Baker, assistant deputy director of the codes and standards division of the Department of Housing and Community Development, “every city and county has a very unique way of processing complaints.” “A notice of violation or corrective order may not be issued in response to what are initially perceived as complaints or violations.”

According to Mitchel Baker, assistant deputy director of the codes and standards division of the Department of Housing and Community Development, “every city and county has a very unique way of processing complaints.” “A notice of violation or corrective order may not be issued in response to what are initially perceived as complaints or violations.”

As the nation and California plunge into a new legal period for mass homelessness, assurances of secure shelter will be crucial in figuring out how many people can stay out of jail or receive more regular tickets. While this was going on, a number of public officials insisted that they would keep providing alternatives and framed the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision as a necessary clarification following years of dispute about whether communities should be permitted to take down tents.

After the ruling, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a statement saying, “This decision removes the legal ambiguities that have tied the hands of local officials for years.” “The state will persist in its compassionate efforts to furnish individuals who are facing homelessness with the necessary resources.”

Since many shelters are closed to visitors and so few locations have filed state reports on conditions, it is frequently difficult to determine what those services are. However, others who have resided in shelters present a more grim image.

Health officials were recently informed by residents of a Huntington Beach shelter about mold growth, recurrent episodes of pneumonia, and neighbors with open sores that were infected. A number of communities have seen lawsuits from homeless people and their families regarding tragic deaths and sexual assaults that occurred in shelters. Sharon Descans, who was kicked out of a more recent type of publicly-funded tent city in San Diego where she claimed she endured unpaid labor, the deaths of several neighbors, and moments of anarchy, has been hopping between shelters and a rented van.

Descans stated, “People are hitting each other with two-by-fours and pulling swords on each other.” “When I first arrived there, all I wanted was to leave.”

Previous issues, fresh shortcomings

Many of the poorest people in California and other states could still afford to stay in inexpensive motels or rent rooms up until the 1980s. Then followed shocks like the AIDS and drug epidemics, along with a tidal wave of gentrification, wage stagnation, and federal cuts to financial assistance and housing. Historians at the National Academies of Sciences estimate that the state’s number of designated beds for mental health patients dropped from 37,000 in less than three decades to barely 2,500 by 1983.

The historians noted that a great deal of people “drifted onto the streets” as planned investments in neighborhood resources fell short of expectations. It was the start of the “modern era of homelessness.”

While some compared large emergency shelters to prison cells or military barracks, others saw them as a temporary solution with bunk beds and shared showers. As home development in California halted and the state’s homeless population skyrocketed to over 181,000—a 40% increase in only the last five years—the shelter triage method gained traction.

Court decisions prohibiting authorities from taking harsh measures against homeless people just for being homeless have played a significant role in the growth of shelters. In the Martin v. Boise case, the courts ruled that the city had issued tickets to individuals for sleeping outside in the absence of “adequate” shelter, in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s limitation on cruel and unusual punishment.

According to Garrow, “what has happened is that counties and cities have quite openly raced to build more shelters in order to criminalize more people.” “Shelters really turn into a branch of the criminal justice system.”

Following a 2019 ACLU study by Garrow that detailed bedbug infestations, overflowing sewage, and sexual harassment by shelter staff, Quirk-Silva introduced the 2021 shelter bill. The results contradicted Quirk-Silva’s observations after she asked people why they weren’t at shelters while chatting with them on the street close to her Fullerton neighborhood. Her own brother battled mental illness, homelessness, and alcoholism before passing away at the age of 50.

Quirk-Silva noticed that shelters were expanding quickly and that guests were staying longer. According to the most recent federal data from 2023, California shelter occupants remain a median of around five months, or 155 days, a 30% rise since 2019.

Garrow backed the 2021 law’s endeavor to establish basic requirements for shelters. She claimed to have witnessed the closure of a few troublesome shelters in Orange County, one of which was an abandoned Santa Ana transit station that was never intended for human habitation and had previously flooded.

Nevertheless, Garrow wasn’t shocked to learn that only a few counties and cities were adhering to the statute, which she claimed was undermined by multiple changes. One eliminated the necessity that unannounced shelter inspections be carried out on a regular basis by local officials. Another objected to the requirement that signage at shelters provide information on how to file complaints.

“I don’t think the low number of complaints is because shelters are now hygienic, clean, and following the new law,” Garrow stated. “However, the fact that people are ignorant”

Cities and counties are required by law to report any situations that are “dangerous, hazardous, imminently detrimental to life or health, or otherwise render the homeless shelter unfit for human habitation” if they discover violations in their shelters. However, even locations that disclose state shelters fail to mention significant possible safety concerns.

For instance, L.A. County has sent listings of the several dozen shelters it operates, along with one-page inventories of violations pertaining to waste, bugs, rodents, and hot water outages. Problems like the 2021 conviction of a former shelter security guard on several counts of sexual assault went unmentioned. or allegations of assaults, fatalities in shelters, and other incidents that show up in police call logs that CalMatters requested.

Post-SCOTUS shelters

After a year of nonstop activity, Sharon Descans decided to take a break from her joints on a concrete seat beneath a palm tree in San Diego’s most beautiful central park, Balboa Park, on a recent Friday. The former collegiate swimmer claimed that she lost two property management jobs, went behind on her rent, and was evicted last year, which is when she first experienced homelessness.

What came next was a tour of desperate housing in a city leading the state’s efforts to eradicate street encampments—a tour she had never sought.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, San Diego authorities were relocating homeless individuals to sizable tent cities—also known as “safe sleeping” sites—that were supported by the public.

Descans and a large number of neighbors resided at a location known as O Lot in ice fishing cottages made of Eskimo brand, which some neighbors claimed leaked easily in the rain. She claimed that because the temporary shelter lacked a door to lock and she saw a lot of drug use and erratic behavior, her anxiety increased there. Descans reported that a neighbor passed away from cancer while living alone in his tent, seemingly for days without anyone coming to check on him.

State reports have not included any information about that. According to state statistics, San Diego is one of many California locations that, despite having more than a dozen shelters and 10,600 homeless people, has not filed any reports following the 2021 shelter rule.

State and local officials stated that there’s no guarantee that they would have documented activities at O Lot even if San Diego had submitted the reports. The nonprofit operator Dreams For Change emphasized that while many homeless persons have temporarily resided at the tent site, it is not officially a shelter according to legal regulations.)

A representative for San Diego County responded by saying that the county does not directly run any shelters when asked if there was a procedure in place for complaints regarding homeless shelters in the county. Cities and counties are nevertheless required by state law to keep an eye on grievances and notify other owners or operators of any infractions at shelters within their jurisdiction.

Five complaints have been made to the city of San Diego since the shelter law was established, according to a spokesman, and “city staff are working on” determining why no state report has been submitted.

Spokesman Matt Hoffman issued a statement saying, “There is a comprehensive complaint process where potential issues are quickly and thoroughly resolved at all city-funded shelters, including the Safe Sleeping and Safe Parking programs.” “Every complaint is investigated, and appropriate action is taken right away.”

Descans attempted to keep her head down at O Lot. She befriended a mother whose son wrestled at a local high school as well. The two learned that doing laundry and cleaning bathrooms for the charity Dreams for Change would earn them enough money to help them get out of the tents. Descans claimed that after working for almost 55 hours and documenting her work with photos and text messages to a site supervisor, she was never paid $1,000 for her services.

Descans was “exited” from the shelter in June, which is nonprofit jargon meaning evicted, according to documents stating she got into a verbal fight with staff and let her 17-year-old son, who lives with other family, visit without permission.

Descans remarked, “I just feel like nobody cares.” “Who even cares about these homeless people? It’s like cover your ass at any expense.”

A representative for Dreams for Change stated that although the group is unable to comment on specific instances, it does have a formal recruiting and payment procedure in place for locals who want to work. The nonprofit continued by saying that it is just one of many contractors that run secure rest areas close to Balboa Park.

After residing at Dreams for Change’s section of O Lot, almost 80 households were able to find permanent homes, according to a statement from spokesperson Kelly Spoon. “Dealing with a diverse population, occasional altercations may arise, but physical altercations are extremely rare,” she said, confirming three deaths at the scene.

Another current occupant of the safe sleeping location, who wished to remain anonymous out of fear of reprisals, expressed concern about deaths, a shortage of meals, sexual assaults reported by female neighbors, and a persistent dearth of information regarding housing choices from caseworkers.

He claimed that “the animals almost get better treatment than the people.” “If you continue to degrade people, you will receive subpar outcomes.”

Before relocating to a government-subsidized flat last month, Shawn Swearigen also resided in a tent in O Lot. The Imperial County resident, the grandson of a cattle rancher, spent years working in the construction industry until becoming homeless due to a 2008 housing meltdown and family deaths.

The homeless man claimed that the tent in Balboa Park “wasn’t bad,” despite the fact that he had discovered that two things are always present in homeless situations: thievery and mental health crises. Having his own place was important to Swearigen, as opposed to being “dormed up” in a bunk bed, as he had experienced while staying at a sizable shelter after being homeless. He claimed that it was so constricting and ineffective that he tried to hide for the following ten years, frequently going camping in the woods.

Swearigen described it as “sort of like a lack of options.” “I truly didn’t want to burden others with my presence.” (Source)