Guess the yearly price tag to reduce homeless in Alameda County, California

Rate this post

Homeless encampment in Berkeley, Alameda County

There are over 1.5 million people in Alameda County. According to the study cited in this story, “…5,600 people experience homelessness on any given night. Over the next five years we aim to reduce that number to less than 2,200 people. If we achieve this goal no one will have to sleep outside.”

Take a wild guess as to how much money is required to achieve their goal. Then double or triple your number.

From SF Chronicle: Every person sleeping on the streets of Alameda County could be placed into housing or shelters if the county more than triples its spending on key programs, a new report says.

There is no obvious source for the more than $200 million a year needed — on top of more than $100 million already being spent annually — to achieve that goal, officials say. That has prompted talk of a potential tax proposal on the 2020 ballot.

The report is an update to a plan crafted more than a decade ago and adopted by Alameda County and its 14 cities seeking to end homelessness by 2020. The problem has grown since then, and the new report says it can be fixed by 2023 — with additional funding.

“When we wrote the 2007 plan, we said homelessness is a solvable issue. We wanted it to be true, but we weren’t sure. We were just building databases,” said Elaine de Coligny, executive director of Everyone Home, the effort to address homelessness in Alameda County.

“We have a lot more information now than we did a decade ago. We are confident in the solutions and strategies. We just haven’t been doing them at the pace and scale required,” she said.

The county spends about $106 million a year on homeless-related programs and subsidizes 3,000 permanent housing units. The report from Everyone Home, which was started by Oakland, Berkeley and county agencies, says those numbers should be $334 million and 9,000.

Sara Bedford, who is on the leadership board of Everyone Home, said reaching the goal is feasible. “I think we do a disservice if we’re not ambitious and realistic at the same time, and I think the plan does both of those things,” said Bedford, director of the Human Services Department of Oakland. “It’s very doable to achieve a functional zero — that you are housing people almost as quickly as they come into homelessness.”

Short of a San Francisco Proposition C-style tax increase or bond measure, that level of funding isn’t expected anytime soon. East Bay officials are beginning to contemplate putting such an initiative on the 2020 ballot.
Meanwhile, the report says, for every homeless person who found housing in 2017, two more became homeless. More than 12,000 people are homeless at some point each year in Alameda County. On any given night, the figure is 5,600.

The report says that if that number can be cut down to 2,200 people, with the additional funding, then no one would have to sleep outside, because there would be enough shelter and housing to go around.

Read the whole story here.


Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:

15 responses to “Guess the yearly price tag to reduce homeless in Alameda County, California

  1. I’d say round ’em up & stash them at the former NAS Alameda, which was closed in the late 1990s. Even though it’s listed as a Superfund cleanup site, and contaminated with PCBs – no big deal, right?

    They can have the homeless work at NAS, to help with the cleanup, and in the process the homeless earn enough so they’re no longer homeless.

  2. I say if any part of their plan involves a liberal the end result will be a disaster.

  3. EveryOneHome wants to more than triple the taxes that by my offhand calculation could produce a building boom for $150 a night per person shelters rivaling even ASPCA kennels or under-bridge encampments in suitability for human habitation, if the hundreds of Dem “housing projects” are any guide. The idea these days isn’t actually building anything at all since we now know actual construction would wastefully cut into the tens of millions that can be ladled like a monetary soup kitchen to leftist groups and to gov salaries to study the problem into the next century. On the other hand, making those Alemeda County low-security nighttime lockups “sustainable” would divert tens of millions to the “green industry” out there, which is itself an inside joke since “green” means much, much more expensive and wasteful of resources but leaving the “green industry” awash in greenbacks extorted from taxpayers. I might fly out there and apply for a job myself in this leftist idea of a gold rush, pretending to help the homeless you never actually have to go near so I can earn the average state & local gov employee’s average wage of about $53/hr, which is probably even higher in California. What are we waiting for when you can earn almost 50% more than if you had a productive private sector job? In the mornings we can have meetings with catered coffee and pastries, then order in for a working lunch making calls for Dem candidates, and after that get bused to a MoveOn hootenanny or have some more meetings until it’s time to go home at 4:30. And when there aren’t enough real homeless to serve as a fig leaf for boondoggles like this we can empty the prisons and mental hospitals to keep the streets filled with homeless people and still keep something like 90% of the money in housing subsidies that, as the record shows, helps mostly virtue-signaling leftists whose real work is helping themselves to taxpayer money.

  4. Planners of NAFTA expected poverty and homelessness in the United States when it was to be implemented with much more to follow on the national fatal march to globalism. Expect it to be reversed when our industrial base returns, and America Becomes Great Again. Of course, that is but a part of the problem, the invading force on our southern border adds to our troubles. It is a case of Western Coudenhove Kalergicide flu, a variant of what is taking place in Europe; expect vaccinations to be available at any time.
    By the way, China will take as much advantage of this as possible, and establish its own manufacturing base and power in the Americas. That country conducts such policies with more wisdom and foresight than we have. Think Panama Canal, Kissinger, David Rockefeller, Long Beach, etc.

  5. This is the definition of insanity.

  6. talk is cheap anyone can afford that… 🤭🤦🏽‍♂️do something about it already

  7. And that’s just the price-tag to REDUCE, not eliminate homelessness!

  8. Cull the heard. Stop feeding the roaches. Might lose some though. Sorry about your bad luck grasshopper. Choices have consequences. If you choose drugs, a life of crime. or to not get help for your mental illness, why should I bear that cost? On the other hand if you are honest, conform to society, instead of the other way around, then most folks will be glad to help you. Don’t hold your hand out if you don’t have any skin in the game.

  9. How do 1.5 million citizens produce $300 million yearly? The goal of housing 3400 with $300, million is $88 thousand per person annually. I imagine there is a much less expensive method. Desert land is much cheaper, and trailers are cheap.

    • Couldn’t $88,000 per homeless person PER YEAR purchase some sort of abode for EACH ONE? My mortgage EVEN in SoCal is way less than half that per year on 3/4 acre in a 2-car garage, 2200 square foot house, with other perks, like front and back covered porches, one of which is 16×40, and with a pool and 2 small barns, a storage shed, and a hen house w/fenced garden. Pretty sure Alemeda Co. could construct a a solo one-bedroom shelter for each of these people for a third of my square footage, my land, my amenaties, and price per year in mortgage. Why are these people STILL living on the street after receiving $88,000 per year each in “programs and services” from Alemeda Co.? Oh wait—–perhaps government at “work” again?

      • Maybe if they weren’t welcome they’d have to do something different? What about setting up camps in the desert? They can work to earn room and board and maybe pick up a work skill. If they’re addicted they should go to rehab. If they’re crazy they can go to the looney bin.

        It all starts with making it extremely difficult to just plop down wherever they land and become a nuisance for everyone else. It isn’t ok to live on the streets. They could do sweeps and take them out to the camps.

        How about that idea? They can work and rent some place to stay, or go to a camp. Lying up on the street is not an option. We even have them in my small town now. I’d say there are about a dozen regulars. I see them every day. They are functional. They like their “lifestyle”. The merchants who they steal from don’t.

        They sleep in the cemetery and in the public parks. There are enough churches that feed one day a week that they can go from church to church and never run out.

        I don’t think that’s really “helping”. That is enabling. When you grow up you’re supposed to be your own parent.

        • LO…agree with you…BUT…..Present-day reality brought to us/ sponsored by our elected officials and higher courts smacks us in the face time and again.

          When I was youthful, the prisoners of the Pennsylvania Penitentiary in Centre County PA….known locally as “The Rock,” worked. They farmed the farmlands of the Penitentiary ( some of which were bought/taken from my ancestral, paternal, family….including their home, which still exists on the penitentiary grounds…..). They provided for their own sustenance…raising crops to sustain not only themselves, but dairy cattle (milk, cheese, butter, etc) , manufacturing things they needed in every day life (soap, herbs, spice mixes….honey thru’ an apiary …etc etc…) AND THEN….one day….the fields went fallow…the dairy cattle disappeared…no beautifully tended vegetable gardens were in evidence as had been always before…….Passing by this one day, I asked my dad what was “going on?” Why were these things missing? He told me:

          It was ruled by the courts that it is supposedly “UN-Constitutional” to “make” or even “ask” these prisoners to contribute to their own day-to-day upkeep. Evidently, once they are remanded to the State or Federal systems….according to the rulings…..ONLY the State or Federal systems will or can “provide” for them. They can NOT be assigned jobs that require them to “provide” for themselves in any way, shape, or form. THANK YOU STATE AND LOCAL AND SUPREME COURTS FOR ROBBING ME IN YET ANOTHER SECTOR OF MY LIFE AND LIVLIHOOD IN FAVOR OF THE MOST UNPRODUCTIVE, MOST HEINOUS EXAMPLES OF OUR SOCIETY. Pretty sure I’m not the only one who feels this way.. 🙁

          • So, how could that decision about the unconstitutionally of the prison system be constitutional itself since “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, EXCEPT as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction“?

  10. Gotta love these bleeding heart do-gooders. They have no clue when it comes to Economics 101 but they sure are good at spending other people’s money.

  11. 9000 people and 338 million – that’s over 37000 per person
    rather high


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.