Homelessness

We support a differentiated response that recognizes the distinct needs of individuals facing economic displacement, behavioral health challenges, addiction, and chronic unsheltered homelessness.

While housing is essential, it is not sufficient for many experiencing chronic homelessness, serious mental illness, or substance use disorder. Public policy should prioritize approaches that pair housing and shelter with appropriate behavioral health services, case management, treatment access, and clear expectations that support long-term stability and community safety.

Addressing unlawful behavior is not the criminalization of homelessness.

We support:

• Lawful enforcement of camping, trespass, and other public safety violations when safe shelter, treatment pathways, or other appropriate placements are available, while ensuring access to services that address mental illness and substance use
• Law enforcement efforts to address property crime, violent crime, and unsafe health conditions throughout the community
• Conservatorship reform and programs to ensure individuals unable to care for themselves receive appropriate care and treatment
• Funding tied to measurable outcomes and accountability, including reductions in unsheltered homelessness, increased treatment engagement, improved housing retention, reduced returns to homelessness, and decreased impacts on public safety and neighborhood conditions

Access to shelter and services must be the first step toward stability.

We support:

• Aggressive local and regional efforts to secure funding for shelter and wraparound services
• Increased investment in behavioral health services, including mental health and substance use treatment
• County support for proven local programs focused on shelter, prevention, and long-term solutions
• Safe, structured short- and long-term interim solutions that reduce impacts on the broader community

Expanding housing options is essential to addressing homelessness.

We support:

• Increased production of housing, particularly for low-income residents
• A full continuum of responses, prioritizing permanent supportive housing, rapid rehousing, and other evidence-based interventions that deliver strong outcomes per public dollar. Interim models should be evaluated case by case based on cost-effectiveness, outcomes, and their ability to move individuals toward long-term stability
• Alternative interim placements that are designed to not inadvertently disrupt eligibility or priority for permanent housing resources—temporary placements that weaken access to permanent supportive housing or rapid rehousing risk creating short-term solutions that undermine long-term stability
• Protection of dedicated local housing funds
• Partnerships to build or repurpose shelter, stabilization settings, and housing with integrated services, supported by clear performance expectations tied to housing retention, treatment engagement, and reduced neighborhood impacts