Tiny Houses and Chico

by Jack

Starting out on a positive note, this vagrancy/homeless problem is not impossible to solve, it’s not going to be easy, but it’s certainly not impossible.  Remember that this problem  was not here 20 years ago.   But, over time, both in our local community and in this state, people in positions of authority have done well intended things, costly things, that  contributed greatly to this problem.

So, if we can create the problem, we can also solve the problem.   However, I must caution you that undoing the mistakes of the past will not be easy nor can they be fixed by… repeating them. Hold that thought as you read on.

At our library you can read the old newspaper accounts that tell the story of what gradually happened in Chico, to the State of Ca. and the entire West Coast.  The latter are stories that center around far left politics, but it’s related to little Chico.   For our purposes lets just focus locally, otherwise I would be writing a book!

It began with the Jesus Center. That was from the very beginning a nuisance to merchants in the immediate area. A research of old newspaper reports tell of chronic vandalism, frequent dumping of trash on business property, urinating and feces in doorways and the thefts.

When the proposed expansion of the Jesus Center was proposed, it was met with opposition by some of the business located nearby.  But their concerns were overshadowed by those who felt we had a duty to provide more beds and expand the center.   They held the emotional argument as champions of the poor.   The other side, those opposing expansion were quickly labeled as mean, heartless curmudgeons that lacked empathy or compassion.  The pro-side were of course the good people, who just wanted to do the right thing.

As you might expect, the homeless shelter expansion went forward and so did the problems associated with the increased homeless population, just as had been predicted!  And I might add, they continue to grow to this day.  So, this is where our local problem  started -  one well known shelter for those on the road.  Thus, “Build it and they will come” became the new slogan for the concerned businesses and property owners and it was not understated or without just cause for concern. Now the problem is reaching deep into Chico and it’s not just those located near the shelters that experience the problems brought here by the new wave of vagrants.

The years passed and now enters the movement for the new  Tiny Houses!   Tiny houses for the homeless is another form of the homeless evolution that began decades back with the Jesus Center expansion and then the other shelters that followed. It’s also part of much grander political problem that has Californians fleeing the state.

Oddly, the newer Torres shelter (near COSTCO) still operates at less than capacity? The Torres Shelter has rules and rules are not always appreciated by the new wave of transients. Disruptive people get kicked out and you can’t bring in booze or drugs!

Once again, the advocates for the homeless rise to meet this challenge. They tell us that we need a new “wet” shelter because the Torres shelter isn’t for everyone. What’s a wet shelter, you may wonder? This is basically a shelter with few rules, come in drunk or high, come in late, you still get a bed. The group that wants a wet shelter now supports the Tiny Houses concept.

There’s a lot more to this problem, obviously. And let me say, there is some merit to both sides which makes it even more confusing. I fully acknowledge this, because that part has led to warring sides, rather than a community united in solving a serious problem.

Currently I see how politics is being injected and how facts are being abused.    Soon we have so much disinformation flying around that the typical voter will just give up to the whims of the hardcore, passionate advocates!   That’s how CA was lost and why we continue to sink into poverty, burdened by high taxes, incompetence and corruption.  Dare I say it,  California has become a disaster of mismanagement under the Democrats?


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Tiny Houses and Chico

  1. Harold says:

    Yes Jack , you should dare to say it, in fact California was once a vibrant area with growth potential, now it is declining in the same path as areas such as Detroit.

    All due to the same liberal failed ideology of governance , California is forcing people and their business to leave.

    Sooner than you can imagine, (as it has already started) California will have created the largest population of people living below national level of poverty.

  2. Jim says:

    The City council has a conservative majority. Yet they have made no attempt to deal with the homelessness and rising crime in Chico. Somehow the factions which want more homelessness in town are in control.

    I am incredibly frustrated that crime and filth has taken over our City. The police seemed to be overwhelmed and not able to control the transients in town. The proposal for a community court might help a little bit. But it won’t be a major solution with out more law enforcement and punishment. I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

    As you have pointed out, there is space in the Tores Shelter if you are sober. Yet most homeless would rather live out side and stay drunk or on drugs. We need to find a way to throw these bums out of town.

    However I do think the tiny house concept might help the small number of homeless who are actually trying to get back to a normal life. As long as the facility limits access to clean, sober and working tenants, I’m in favor of this project.

  3. Libby says:

    “Dare I say it, California has become a disaster of mismanagement under the Democrats?”

    But you are still here. And I’ll tell you why you are still here … because none of this is the truth, particularly the crux of your argument, that The Jesus Center comes before the homeless arrive … this is bunk. It comes after.

    And there’s a paradox in your worldview that I have never been able to reconcile. If you really don’t want to do anything for the homeless, thinking this will drive them away, why can’t you just step over them with impunity, and can all the complaining?

    Is it because you are not able to impose your view, your will, on the rest of us? I certainly hope not. I’ll have to drag out the “F” word again.

    And suppose you could persuade us. Do you think all these people would be driven away? I doubt it. Probably the auto burglary rate would go through the roof, and it costs a whole lot more to jail them than to shelter them. You just make no sense, fiscally, morally, or any otherwise.

  4. Tina says:

    “…If you really don’t want to do anything for the homeless…”

    Thus begins the confusion.

    The problem at it’s core has developed and gotten worse over decades due to sanctimonious folks on the left who solve problems never anticipating the disastrous unintended consequences of their revolutionary thinking.

    First they freed the mentally ill and over time abandoned them to the streets when their group home concept didn’t take root. They later crashed the economy and sustained near depression for seven years by growing the size of government and catering to the dependent and needy while simultaneously failing to repair educational institutions and destroying religion and the family.

    On a personal level they have actively worked to: Get rid of God and smothering rules. Defy authority. Encourage reckless behaviors. Eschew notions of personal responsibility. Tear down the family.

    At the education level they control they: Educate in a feelings based environment where the ability to think independently is discouraged. Use shaming tactics to break notions of individuality. Convince people they are always special. Erase winners and losers…throw real achievement out the window. Create dependency. Get rid of accountability. Embrace the dysfunctional as “normal.”

    Institutionally: Sell government as the answer to all problems, dreams, expectations and aspirations. Flatten the economy and oppress businesses, enemy of government dependency, through increased taxation and regulation. Destroy the middle class. Open borders to the needy and have government provide. Go soft on crime, law and order. Redefine what it means to be functional.

    What follows is a crisis. High crime, drug use, and joblessness. A vast and growing unskilled population that can’t think and won’t act responsibly. Gobs of people living desperate lives on the streets.

    The sanctimonious say they have a solution. More shelters, more free food, free healthcare and more dependency. Fix it by taking even more money from the productive to provide everything for the ever growing numbers of totally dysfunctional and dependent people that their ideas, attitudes, and policies helped to create.

    And then, to add the cherry atop the sanctimony, have the utter gall to defend that position by smearing as insensitive and cruel anyone that points out what should be obvious…you can’t work to make sure people grow up dumb and dependent and at the same time expect them to thrive and be productive. You’ve created the perfect vicious circle.

    You can’t “jail” them. The jails are already full. In fact, in sanctimonious California, the jails were so full they just let the criminals go early to make room, adding to the problems on the street. You can’t “drive them away.” The problem is rampant in every community.

    Jack doesn’t deserve the “F” word. Someone has it all wrong…”fiscally, morally, or any otherwise.” She won’t see it. She’s among those who has either lost or never had the ability to think critically. She is an emotion based true believing comrade.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.