Comments
ALPERN AT LARGE - As the Proposition 1 measure goes out for voting, it’s always been a wonder to me as to WHO is voting for MORE money to pay for the homeless (bonds, taxes, whatever) when we’re ALREADY supposed to be paying for them in a cost-effective manner.
In other words, we’ve paid for, and supposed to pay for now and in the future, the homeless within our state budget.
Yet somehow, Sacramento decided to spend that money either:
1) Elsewhere in a fiscally juvenile and inappropriate manner
2) Cost-ineffectively in a fiscally juvenile and inappropriate manner
Hence, we must FOCUS with the $6.5 billion state homeless bond measure (which—let’s face it—is probably for the public saving-of-face of Governor Newsom who wants to someday become President) with the following talking points/questions:
1) Did we break up the homeless encampments during COVID?
NO! Which calls into question all the lockdowns, masking, etc. that the rest of us were supposed to put up with while we gave the homeless more rights than the rest of us.
2) Did we pay for homeless facilities in a cost-effective manner?
NO! Which calls into question the BIG talking point of whether our state, cities, and counties will suddenly spend smarter and better to actually FIX the problem rather than just EXPLOIT the problem for more public-sector jobs and graft.
3) Did we prioritize the homeless during the illegal immigrant surge?
NO! Which calls into question why we’re paying $6.5 billion a YEAR for illegal immigrants to enjoy benefits BEFORE the homeless and taxpayer populations of California.
4) Is the $6.5 billion bond measure ENOUGH to pay for our homeless problem?
NO! Which calls into question whether Sacramento is trying to create a new public sector long-term/permanent jobs program versus fixing the problem.
For those of us here in L.A., the city and county measures we passed for the homeless to be housed, counseled, taken care of, etc. did NOT help the issue (and perhaps made it worse because of the financial incentive to NOT fix the problem).
So why would the state measure be any better with respect to OUTCOMES?
It would NOT. They know that in Sacramento, right after they voted (without our consent) to pay for free health care for illegal immigrants on an annual basis for the same amount we are supposed to pay for the entire homeless problem.
So why is Sacramento now going to guilt the daylights out of us for more money that they already HAVE, and are choosing not to use to address the homeless issues?
Because they think they can succeed. They believe they CAN.
So, shall we presume that someone ELSE will pay for these bonds?
Because that someone else is YOU.
Always has been. Always will be.
(Kenneth S. Alpern, M.D, is a dermatologist who has served in clinics in Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside Counties, and is a proud husband and father. He was active for 20 years on the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) as a Board Member focused on Planning and Transportation, and helped lead the grassroots efforts of the Expo Line as well as connecting LAX to MetroRail. His latest project is his fictional online book entitled The Unforgotten Tales of Middle-Earth, and can be reached at [email protected])
