Whittier’s plans to build a homeless shelter are just getting off the ground and local leaders are already facing pushback.
At a Whittier City Council meeting on Tuesday night, at least a dozen area residents vehemently challenged early plans for a shelter on city-owned land in a suburban neighborhood along the 605 freeway.
“I’ve lived [here] for pretty much 30 years of my life, and I’ve never been as scared as I am right now,” Robert Herrera, who says he lives next to the potential shelter site on Esperanza Avenue, told the council.
Herrera says that if a homeless shelter were built in the neighborhood, he’d be worried about kids going outside “wondering if some mentally ill person is going to do something to them” or seeing “someone defecating in the street, urinating in the street.”
“Esperanza translated into English means hope,” said Michelle Tapia. “This small yet powerful four letter word is what growing up on Esperanza gave my family. Hope is what you will take away from us by building a homeless shelter in our small community.”
“People will be scared to let their kids go outside,” said Art Tapia.
Whittier officials say they’re still in the very early stages of planning the shelter. On Tuesday night, the City Council voted in favor of a memorandum of understanding with the county of Los Angeles for $300,000 in funding.
The site hasn’t been finalized, but city officials are looking at putting it on a three-acre parcel that abuts unincorporated Los Angeles County, in a residential neighborhood between the freeway and San Gabriel River
In the next four to six months, city manager Jeff Collier says the goal is to complete an environmental analysis of site at 5913 Esperanza Avenue and come up with a preliminary design. The number of beds and types of services that would be offered still needs to be sussed out.
“There’s nothing keeping another encampment from popping up,” says City Councilmember Henry Bouchot. “This is our best time for this.”
The number of homeless residents across the Los Angeles region has ballooned 12 percent countywide over the last year, according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. In the south eastern portion of Los Angeles County, which includes Whittier, there are 6,891 homeless residents, up from 4,569 in 2018, the Whittier Daily News reports.
Contrary to public perception, most homeless residents, according to LAHSA, do not have a serious mental illness or substance abuse issues. The vast majority lack permanent shelter, with many living in vehicles and tents.
Referencing a September decision from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that prevents cities from prosecuting people who sleep on sidewalks and other public spaces—if they lack enough housing or shelter beds—Bouchot says that if Whittier can build enough shelter beds, it can start cleaning up the parks and medians that have attracted encampments.
He supports putting the shelter on the Esperanza site, but at least one city councilmember is wary.
“I’m not a fan of densifying homelessness in a region that’s already impoverished,” said Councilmember Josué Alvarado.
“I’m almost flabbergasted at the idea that we’re trying to export our problem to your backyard,” he said, addressing residents who live in unincorporated Los Angeles County and oppose the shelter going up on Esperanza. “The brunt of the homeless issue in the city of Whittier is always exported to the west side, now it’s including some of the unincorporated areas.”
Those residents told the council that the neighborhood is already challenged by crime, graffiti, and disinvestment.
“I can’t tell you how many times my mother has picked up used needles from her backyard,” said Melissa De Luna. “Adding a homeless shelter will only makes things worse.”
Throughout Los Angeles, communities have fought plans for homeless shelters, from Venice Beach to Koreatown to Sherman Oaks, and Bouchout says that no matter where Whittier puts a shelter, some residents would resist it.
“There’s perhaps no population more reviled, more hated, and more pushed out than homeless people,” Bouchot said. “The inequity really lies with homeless people who have nowhere to sleep, nowhere to rest, nowhere to find comfort from the deprivations of our society.”
Comments
Key fact heartless NIMBY idiots; the homeless aren’t homeless when they are sheltered.
24 busy-bodies with nothing better to do on a weekday night than go to planning meetings shouldn’t be able to end a project like this. Politicians trying to placate 24 people (who will NEVER be happy no matter what) while risking the votes of tens of thousands of people who support the shelter but don’t have time to go to meetings are idiots.
By Greyvagabond on 07.12.19 11:09am
"the homeless aren’t homeless when they are sheltered." No, but then you have drug addicts, alcoholics and mentally ill people permanently living next door to you. The homeless can be moved, but once the shelter is there, it is there. The later is far worse.
By LADude on 07.12.19 12:22pm
… and remember, once the shelter is there, it will attract even more addicts and mentally ill people. Who would want that in their neighborhood?
By Teddy Clarke on 07.12.19 12:32pm
By Greyvagabond on 07.12.19 1:06pm
It’s called induced demand. If you provide homeless services, the homeless will come for those services. That’s why there are so many homeless on skid row.
By LADude on 07.12.19 1:22pm
Totally explains homeless encampments in river beds and under overpasses.
What world do you live in?
By Greyvagabond on 07.12.19 2:05pm
It’s the idiotic permissiveness of allowing hordes of out of state drug addicts to camp out in CA, fool
By Transplant Trash on 07.13.19 12:40am
Totally explains why the greatest concentration of homeless people is skid row. But of course they can’t all fit there, duh.
By LADude on 07.15.19 10:34am
For a total misunderstanding of the term "induced demand," see above. I get what you’re going for, but 1) there is zero evidence of that being the case and 2) the analogy would be that because shelters exist, more people choose to become homeless….
By tmcclintock on 07.12.19 4:26pm
Are you arguing that there is zero evidence that if you provide homeless services in a location, then the homeless will come to that location for those services?
And you are applying a narrow application of induced demand probably derived from its application to traffic. Induced demand is a broader concept than just traffic and the concept applied here is demand for certain services in a specific location. It’s pretty simple and straightforward, if you provide homeless services in a location, then you create a demand for those services as the homeless will go to that location for services. By way of an analogy that you can understand, if you build a truck stop with food and rest places for truckers, then there will be an increased demand for gas sales at that location (to service the trucks). You are not inducing people to become truckers but rather inducing demand for a certain service at that location.
By LADude on 07.15.19 10:47am
I’m struggling with the position of anti-homeless folks that the homeless are both uninterested in homeless services ("they don’t even want to go to the shelters") and are so interested in services that a single shelter will draw homeless people from all over the city.
By Partymuscles on 07.15.19 12:34pm
Whether or not you agree with the position, it’s not that hard to reconcile the two. "Services" includes things like free needle exchanges, minor medical treatment, food, sometimes portable showers, handing out clothing, etc. None of which are conditioned on actually staying in/sleeping in a shelter.
A homeless person who does not feel like sleeping in the shelter due to no-drug policies or curfews (usually the most common reasons) will still readily take advantage of these other services/handouts. Pretty straightforward.
By disqusted on 07.15.19 3:11pm
Obviously nobody wants a shelter in their neighborhood… but therein lies the problem. Every neighborhood feels the same as yours, so we just kick the can down the road, like we’ve been doing for decades, and the problem only gets worse.
The way to solve this is every neighborhood (rich or poor) has to have some skin in the game.
By corner soul on 07.15.19 11:27am
And I guarantee you that the number of residents in Whitter who oppose this far outnumber the handful of people that support this. The reality is that objective, rational people don’t want these shelters in their neighborhoods because there is literally no upside.
By LADude on 07.12.19 12:25pm
The county overwhelmingly agreed to tax itself to build these shelters. The expectation was that they would be built SOMEWHERE. Nobody wants them in their neighborhood, but everybody understands that we NEED them. So kow-towing to random upset neighbors is ignoring the will of the majority of the rest of the County.
By Greyvagabond on 07.12.19 2:06pm
"Random upset neighbors" So you have spoken with all of the residents in Whittier to conclude that these are random upset neighbors and not a reflection of what the residents near this location think? As I said before, I guarantee you that more of them oppose this than support this. No one wants this in their neighborhood let alone their street. Why don’t they build the shelter next door to your house?
By LADude on 07.15.19 10:51am
I hope they do. They are planning one down the block from me and I’m supporting it.
By Greyvagabond on 07.15.19 1:28pm
Good for the residents of Whittier. Give every homeless person $500 and a bus ticket to San Francisco or Seattle. Problem solved.
By Teddy Clarke on 07.12.19 11:47am
Congratulations on being the first to post this idiotic take on this thread. I’m sure others will follow, but you were first!
By LosFeliz$ean on 07.12.19 12:03pm
How many street people are you taking in? Or you and your neighbors should volunteer your street for a homeless shelter. Lead by example!
By Teddy Clarke on 07.12.19 12:17pm
"Unless you literally put a homeless person in your house you can’t possible oppose a plan they either builds concentration camps in the deserts or just moves the problem to a different city."
Genius level take there.
By Greyvagabond on 07.12.19 1:05pm
I don’t remember seeing any homeless shelters in Los Feliz so there’s that. Why not LosFeliz$ean???
By MartyinLA on 07.15.19 1:25pm
that’s not an argument.
By Lascivious Cumquat on 07.14.19 10:08am
Do people call you an idiot a lot?
By Mildred Fillmore on 07.12.19 1:00pm
Good plan. Because homeless people don’t know how to take a bus BACK to Los Angeles.
Are you planning on personally funding this endless bus loop in perpetuity?
By MMVic on 07.13.19 7:46am