California’s Housing Initiatives Under Scrutiny

Experts suggest that California should focus on recovery efforts before allocating taxpayer-funded housing for the homeless.

Tom Wolfe, leading a movement to reform the state’s failing homelessness system, argues that helping individuals overcome addiction is crucial to preventing them from returning to the streets.

A recent report revealed that 40% of individuals placed in housing through Los Angeles’ $300 million initiative found themselves homeless again within months.

This raises questions about the Housing First model in California, which currently allows individuals to obtain housing without needing to abstain from substances or participate in treatment programs.

“It’s essentially a way of putting people with addiction and mental health issues in one location and expecting them to sort it out themselves,” Wolfe explained, highlighting ongoing frustrations with Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration.

“Addiction and mental illness often remain untreated; they just manifest behind closed doors instead of on the streets,” he added.

Wolfe, who has faced homelessness and addiction personally, shares that reaching a turning point came when he had to choose between incarceration, life on the streets, or structured treatment.

“It saved my life,” he reflected. “I had a reason to change. Without that push, I might not be here.” Now, he advocates for what he terms “recovery-based housing,” a program that includes mandatory sobriety and participation in recovery services.

Last year, a bill aimed at this concept gained traction but was vetoed by Newsom before becoming law.

“We’re not against Housing First,” Wolfe clarified. “We just think it shouldn’t be the only approach.” Recently, a federal judge dealt a setback to the Trump administration’s attempts to alter homeless assistance programs linked to Housing First.

The ruling upheld a lower court’s decision and poses a threat to advocates, who fear up to 170,000 individuals could be removed from federally funded housing and pushed back into homelessness.

Proponents of Housing First contend that abstinence requirements may hinder people from seeking assistance. However, Wolfe points out successful counterexamples, such as a sober shelter in San Francisco that mandates abstinence and drug testing; it remains fully occupied with a waiting list.

“Motivating people struggling with addiction can lead to more individuals seeking help,” Wolfe stated. “Without that motivation, the cycle continues.”

Meanwhile, spending on these initiatives continues to rise.

Wolfe estimates that San Francisco allocates about $450 million annually for housing services affecting roughly 16,000 individuals, while Los Angeles might spend nearly $700 million annually.

“If we’re investing $2.5 billion a year in rent subsidies, I think it’s reasonable to have certain requirements,” he said.

Wolfe has been invited to a national homelessness summit in Washington, D.C., next week, a sign that his message is resonating beyond California.

He plans to leverage that platform to advocate for a shift toward recovery-based housing policies, stating, “We need to underscore that the current methods aren’t effective. We owe individuals more than just a roof over their heads.”

Attempts to obtain a comment from Mayor Karen Bass regarding this issue were unsuccessful.