>"Tenant screening and selection practices promote accepting applicants regardless of their sobriety
or use of substances, completion of treatment, or participation in services"<p>This is such an important piece of a complex puzzle. It easy to see from the outside that substance abuse is self-destructive behavior. The problem is that these abusers, consciously or not, feel that the substance is the only thing that helps them and keeps them from totally losing their shit. The authoritarian approach of "quit abusing substances or no housing for you" has failed spectacularly.<p>Getting these people on the path of recovery requires the lower tiers of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (like safety, food, shelter, etc...) to be securely in place first.
Ok, it’s been 5 years. At this point the state <i>should</i> be able to point to quantitative and qualitative improvements in the homeless population. Can they? If so, where are those studies?
Unconditional housing is the only way. Its cheaper than having them live on the streets for the city. Its also morally imperative to have a safety net for our most vulnerable. They are our friends & family of this country and deserve better.
What if you offer a homeless person free housing and they decline? If there is housing available but they still choose to camp on the sidewalk, should the police then move them away?