City buys hotel for homeless

As the city of San Mateo embarks on an ambitious plan to get its most haggard and troubled residents off downtown streets, veterans of San Francisco's fight against chronic homelessness have two words of ...

[Ella]

Anybody else see the problem here? San Mateo taking advice from San Francisco on how to address the homeless problem? San Francisco? The center for an out of control homeless population. The center for rampant drug addicted, permanent intactable homeless population.

San Mateo has begun a long journey down a black hole of endless handouts and growth of support serviuces. The end result will be an ever increasing homeless population. Word spreads fast - go where the handouts are.

Soon we will be faced with demands from out of town bums, drug addled freaks, and homeless criminals for services and housing. Wonder4ful.

Guiliani did it right. Arrest the criminals, run off the bums. Cleaned up Central Park without having to provide one single meal or home.

[In God we Trust]

Sounds like the San Mateo City Council is populated by a bunch of liberal idiots. Is San Mateo trying to give Berkeley a run for its money when it comes to having idiots on a City Council? Now we know why the rates and fees on City services are so high in San Mateo. The fools on the San Mateo City Council are buying hotels for homeless people. Why don't these clowns just buy each of the homeless people a house in San Mateo. I'm sure they can come up with a new property tax to pay for this.

Why are we electing fools like this to the City Council? Aren't there any intelligent people out there willing to run for the Council?

[CIA MAN]

MORONS IN SAN MATEO. Doesn't work here in the city, won't work in San Mateo. How bout these bums take some personal responsibility and stopping having the government waste our hard earned tax dollars.

[Souperman]

Here we are, the richest country in history, with money to invade soveriegn nations but without money to shelter our homeless. Our tax system helps the wealthy and penalizes the poor. We have poor health care for all but the wealthy.

We are fortunate to have a local government that takes this small step to care for the less able.

[Sally]

Less able? Obviously you haven't visited our "homeless" population. Driunks, drug addicts, ex-felons, mentally ill. Exactly what sytem will cure that? Most of these people are chronic hard cases with multiple issues that have nothing to do with a "home".

Even if you housed every single one, their behaviour would not change at all.

Im not weealthy but have great health care. Souperman is Stuporman.

[In God We Trust]

Souperman, you wrote:

"Our tax system helps the wealthy and penalizes the poor. We have poor health care for all but the wealthy."

My response:

You don't have to be wealthy to have good health care. All you need is a good job. Having a good job doesn't necessarily make you wealthy. The problem with access to quality health care is that having it should not be attached to having a jobs. A person should have access to quality health care whether or not they have a job.

As far as the City of San Mateo buying a hotel for homeless people; the problem with this is that the City of San Mateo is inviting a homeless disaster upon itself because homeless people are drawn to areas where there are support services. The more homeless friendly services a city offers; the more homeless people it will have. San Mateo will start seeing a dramatic increase in its homeless population very soon. The question is, just how homeless friendly is the City of San Mateo? Is it will to provide room and board for every homeless person who comes to San Mateo? What happens if 1,000 new homeless people come to San Mateo? What happens if 10,000 new homeless people come to San Mateo? How about 100,000 homeless people?

Why is the City of San Mateo setting itself up as a homeless haven and exposing its residents to all of the problems associated with harboring a large homeless population?

[Souperman]

Sally,

We have the highest incarceration rate in the civilized world so being an ex felon is not uncommon. And if you are mentally ill, you are not to blame. I am sure that amongst the homeless there are hard cases as there are in the population at large but how about the others? And how about the children (a large proportion of homeless are children).

You are indeed fortunate to have great health care,

[Souperman]

In God We Trust,

I agree that health care should not be tied to your job, it should be a right, not a priviledge.

San Mateo has limited resources, but they do have some. A homeless hotel is a worthwhile purchase and maybe it will encourage our neighbours (Hillsborough, Atherton, etc ;-) to provide similar help.

We should be proud that we are taking the first step.

[Sally]

In the Bay Area this comment just blows your socks off: If you are menatally ill you SHOULD BE INSTITUTIONALIZED.

But the liberal ideology is these people should decide for themselves. Therefore, we have homeless dreks wandering around in these incoherent states.

And children of the homeless should be placed in Foister homes - PERIOD. There should never be one homeless child. A child has a right to live in a home and go to a school and be fed and clothed. If their homeless parents cannot provide this then we are better to take them into homes that can ofdfer this. NO HOMELESS CHILDREN.

But of course the above is always such a problem for our Bay Area progressive agenda folks. So when a mentally diseased person dies in the cold of the street these same folks indict all of society. Give me a f***king break.

[CIA MAN]

Sally, I'm pleasently surprised to find a fountain of conservative knowledge coming out of Belmont.

Souperman, what else should be a right?

Smoking weed?
Shooting cops?
Re-writing history for an agenda?

Just tell me where to stop, because this and other things are what liberals defend or stand for.

[Sally]

The problem with "men" like souperman is that they see someone without something and they emotionally think someone else should give it tom them.
But the truly needy go with nothing. Because the slackers and lazy take up all the benefits.

When `health care is a right, then soon it will be housing. Then food. Then a car (with gas of course). These whimps simply cannot stop spending your money for their feelings.

Ball-less men are so un-sexy.

[Bad move]

If you do something like this it only opens the door for more homeless people to come to town. Why dont we just put a giant tent some where with port-a-pottys and a 24 hr. guard? Call it the county homeless center? 1.5 million for a hotel? Sounds like a waste of money in my opinion.

[Souperman]

Sally,

We had State mental institutions. They were shut down by the Reagan administration and the patients tossed out onto the street.

CIA man

Weed is not as bad as smoking or alcohol.
Shooting cops is a crime. So is shooting homeless people.
Invasion of Iraq is wrong and no amount of re writing history will make it right.

[Sally]

Souperman you are such a tool.

Reagan closed them in his first month's in the Govornor's office because THE PAT BROWN LIBERALS passed the law when Brown was Govornor. Reagan was following the law that went into effect when he came into office. He gets the blame from liberals who realized what a big mistake they made in the Brown Administration.

A FACT that whimps and tools like you are so happy to forget.

IT IS THE LIBERAL THAT CLOSED THOSE HOSPITALS. Remember "One Flew Over the CuckCoo's Nest"? That was Ken Kesey, the guru to the druggies, who slammed the mental institutions. It was very popular at one time to hate these institutions for these derelicts.

Just so you know, I taught both Government and Politics at UC Berkeley. I also have a black belt in karate and could probably whip your sorry feminist sole.

So now we have mental patients on our streets and you think the solution is to give them a home.

WHAT IDIOTS !!!!!!!!!!

[In God We Trust]

Sally wrote:

"Just so you know, I taught both Government and Politics at UC Berkeley. I also have a black belt in karate and could probably whip your sorry feminist sole."

My reply:

Yawn

[Terminator]

Sally wrote:

In the Bay Area this comment just blows your socks off: If you are menatally ill you SHOULD BE INSTITUTIONALIZED.
But the liberal ideology is these people should decide for themselves. Therefore, we have homeless dreks wandering around in these incoherent states.
And children of the homeless should be placed in Foister homes - PERIOD. There should never be one homeless child. A child has a right to live in a home and go to a school and be fed and clothed. If their homeless parents cannot provide this then we are better to take them into homes that can ofdfer this. NO HOMELESS CHILDREN.
But of course the above is always such a problem for our Bay Area progressive agenda folks. So when a mentally diseased person dies in the cold of the street these same folks indict all of society. Give me a f***king break.

As was the homeless shot and killed by the police in downtown San Mateo. I knew this man for years and watched as he slowly decompensated. It's a shame that someone hadn't seen this before the police took his life. Yes, institutionlizing the mentally ill is one thing, but if appropriate resource had reached him prior to the shooting incident, he would be alive today. This city/county needs a long-term solution to it's homeless issues. Providing a shelter where a San Mateo County Homeless Resident can come to without fear of loosing thier bed or having to enter into a system of checks and balances would be most appropriate.

[Terminator]

Sally wrote:

Less able? Obviously you haven't visited our "homeless" population. Driunks, drug addicts, ex-felons, mentally ill. Exactly what sytem will cure that? Most of these people are chronic hard cases with multiple issues that have nothing to do with a "home".
Even if you housed every single one, their behaviour would not change at all.
Im not weealthy but have great health care. Souperman is Stuporman.

Sally, I think it would be prudent to offer a year-round shelter to the homeless in this county. It was proven very beneficial in years past when the county housed it's homeless in the national guard armory. Now, with the new site located in South San Francisco, CA it's practially impossible for a homeless person to navagate to it, and once in, you only have 90 beds and have to enter a program to stay. I say, there needs to be a place where the homeless can go without worry of being tossed out because they dont' enter programs?

[Sally]

It hasn't worked anywhere else. Shelter is just one symptom of a larger festering problem.

The one you are so sorry about, the dead one. Examine this a bit closer. He was approaching the police with a knife in his hands. This after the police were called because of his bizarre and threatening behaviour.

You even think that entering a program in exchange for a bed and shelter is an imposition for these people.

A solution that will bug you and your hyper-sensibilities but will offer real soultions for the rest of us:

1) Criminals go to jail
2) Mentally ill are sent to institutions
3) Drug addicts and abusers are given one chance to clean up or they go either to jail or a ticket out of town. Yes, a program.
4) No Homeless children. These are placed in good clean foster homes.
5) Those not wanting to do anything but populate the streets get a bus ticket out of here.

The above would offer the rest of us some true solutions. Catering to homeless people who have no capacity for responsible behaviour is a waste of our time.

[John Van Dyke]

Atta Sally, can't agree more. Unfortunately straight and clear forward thinking is not popular in the fuzzu-wuzzy Bay area. In CA it was the Brown administration, nationally it was Ted Kennedy who led the movement to close the mental hospitals. However, if you are homeless better not try to get to close to his Hyannis compound. Try advocate housing the homeless in the rich and liberal bastions in Atherton or Hillsborough!

[mdavidsf]

Ella wrote:

Anybody else see the problem here? San Mateo taking advice from San Francisco on how to address the homeless problem? San Francisco? The center for an out of control homeless population. The center for rampant drug addicted, permanent intactable homeless population.
San Mateo has begun a long journey down a black hole of endless handouts and growth of support serviuces. The end result will be an ever increasing homeless population. Word spreads fast - go where the handouts are.
Soon we will be faced with demands from out of town bums, drug addled freaks, and homeless criminals for services and housing. Wonder4ful.
Guiliani did it right. Arrest the criminals, run off the bums. Cleaned up Central Park without having to provide one single meal or home.

You are 100% correct!!!