Steller: We're helping animals; put homeless people next

The choice most of the voters made — to pay up to $22 million for a new Pima Animal Care Center — raised the eyebrows of some local homeless people and their advocates.

“They’ll help the animals, but they won’t help us people,” said Terri Franco, a homeless woman I’ve been writing about this year who lives in a camp on the bottom of the Santa Cruz River.

“And we’re even better with the animals than regular society is,” added Franco, who’s adopted several abandoned dogs.

My wife tells me not to pit two good causes against each other. So how about this: Now that we’ve voted to build a new animal care center with all the attendant facilities, let’s turn our attention to housing homeless people.

The vehicle is there to be used — the Pima County Bond Advisory Committee has been coming up with a list of possible projects to pay for in a new bond election that could occur as soon as next year. The philosophy is justified: Other states and cities have used a “housing first” approach that focuses on getting homeless people in a home. And the cost could be lower even than the animal care center project, depending on what approach we take.

For now, the bond advisory committee has on its list of possible bond projects $30 million for affordable housing. The proposal makes it clear that money is not specifically intended to help homeless people, but rather for “low and moderate income families living in Pima County.”

Homeless advocate Michele Ream has been working to bring the concept of inexpensive huts for homeless people to Tucson, working with pastor Davide Ferrari to get the first few units built at Central City Assembly, 939 S. 10th Ave. She said she could do a lot with less than $30 million.

The huts that have been put up in cities such as Portland, Oregon, could cost only $1,000 each, or less. Ferrari said only $200 or $300 has gone into the huts at his church.

Asked what she would do with the money, Ream said, “I would do tiny houses or homeless huts. Small groupings, not more than 15, all around the city. I would also add a shower, laundry and locker facility as well.”

The idea is that clusters of huts are dispersed so they don’t overwhelm a particular neighborhood. Each could have a shared facility where homeless people could take showers, use the bathroom and store belongings.

That way, their fundamental needs are met and the stress of finding a place to stay is alleviated, allowing them to focus on getting a job or otherwise building a more stable life.

Beyond Portland, Utah is the state that’s taken the greatest lead in building housing for homeless people. The state has been able to cut its chronic homeless population by about 74 percent by focusing on getting people in a home first, then offering services as needed. In February, Gordon Walker, the director of housing and community development for the state of Utah, told me that housing homeless people cost the state less than dealing with them on the streets.

For now, that $30 million in Pima County is just a wish. The projected cost listed in the proposal is $20,000 per unit, with a goal of completing at least 1,500 new affordable homes. That money could go to “transitional” housing, the county’s affordable housing program manager, Betty Villegas, told me. A previous bond program helped build Esperanza en Escalante, a project to help homeless vets get off the streets.

That $30 million “would be an opportunity to do many different affordable housing projects, from homeless all the way to renovating multi-family housing units that need a lot of repairs,” Villegas said.

However, there are other wished-for projects on the list, such as $35 million for the renovation of the old Pima County Courthouse, that could make any ballot issue the Pima County Board of Supervisors sends to voters. And Pima County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry has recommended cutting the affordable housing component of any bond question in half, to $15 million, though he gave the thumbs-up to the idea of spending $120 million more on open-space acquisition.

So it’s in no way guaranteed that housing for the homeless will emerge from that process. But it should, especially after our vote for homeless pets.