by Jordan Davis
Today, Housing First is facing so many threats, but I remember it having broad-based support when I came of age in the 2000s during the administration of George W. Bush. I grew up in a working class Democratic family who hated “Dubya,” and I frequently protested the Iraq war, Bush’s anti-environmental policies, and his overall political platform. I also do not like the recent nostalgia for the Bushes and Cheneys from Democrats in the face of Trump. However, one good thing Bush did was pushing through the concept of Housing First , something that I would not appreciate until I personally dealt with poverty and homelessness. I will die on the Housing First hill, and if there is an afterlife, I will haunt “shelter first” advocates.
Recently, Donald Trump approved federal funding for permanent supportive housing in New York City, but only with strings attached—specifically that the providers would not promote what he calls “gender ideology” or support immigrants’ rights. Transgender people already frequently face economic discrimination, higher risks of homelessness and obstacles to exiting homelessness; undocumented individuals often have specific barriers to accessing government benefits.
Furthermore, the current administration issued a directive stating that providers of federally funded permanent supportive housing would no longer have to follow Housing First principles. In addition, Trump has tapped Texas pastor and former NFL player Scott Turner as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Turner takes the position that Housing First should be set aside for mandatory treatment and “faith-based” initiatives.
As a transgender woman and as a non-Christian, I am frightened of such rhetoric and for the future of people like me. I believe that any faith-based organization should be banned from contracting for any homeless services. We need housing, not Jesus.
Furthermore, not all people who use drugs while living in permanent supportive housing are disruptive; many want treatment, but can’t access it. Although the federal government hasn’t yet abolished Housing First, and the city of San Francisco has a lot of permanent supportive housing that is not federally funded, I am still worried about what is happening at the local level.
We now have a moderate Board of Supervisors and a new mayor who is more conservative than his predecessor. Mayor Daniel Lurie has been focused on the expansion of shelter, but with scant details on how to expand PSH so that those in shelters can exit to housing. Several supervisors, including Board President Rafael Mandelman, also seem gung-ho on promoting drug-free housing policies. This flies in the face of a UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative study, which found that most unhoused people are not illicit drug users, a significant portion cut down their drug use after becoming homeless, and those who sought treatment often couldn’t access it. Still, some trolls on X won’t let facts get in the way of a good story.
Even permanent supportive housing landlords advocate for turning away from the Housing First model. Randy Shaw, the head of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, called for requiring permanent supportive housing tenants to enter case management within 30 days of moving into PSH units (Disclosure: I am a tenant at a THC building).
I believe in the need for wraparound services in housing, especially for those with higher needs. At the same time there are a lot of permanently disabled tenants who do not deserve to be forced into congregate settings forever, as well as drug users who do not cause disruption to other tenants. Furthermore, the effectiveness of mandatory case management is still unproven, and what safeguards against unfair treatment of tenants isn’t yet known.
Even if a tenant simply remains stably housed using minimal case management or none, it is still a success story for all, because that tenant is no longer on the streets, and the City is using fewer resources on temporary shelter.
Despite increased opposition from the federal government, San Francisco still must lead the way, meet people where they are, and use proven solutions, as opposed to failed proposals from the early 2000s.
