About the Debate:

Despite California being one of the richest states per capita in the richest country in the world, California has the highest homeless population in the nation, with 171,521 people experiencing homelessness, which represents 30% of the nation’s homeless population. The state also has one of the highest per capita homeless rates in the nation at 0.44% of its population. This is despite decades of efforts by Federal, state, and non-profit actors to eliminate homelessness, whether it be through public housing, work programs, or homeless shelters.

These efforts have been met with resistance by NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) actors. Though many of them might agree that homelessness programs are needed, none want those programs to happen near them. Such programs, they may argue, lower local housing prices due to the construction of undesirable affordable and homeless housing. And they may argue that from the perspective of the homeowners, these programs might make the area generally less desirable for living, whether it be from an assessed increase in crime or the arrival of perceived "undesirables."

This has led many state actors frustrated, because though laws combating homelessness are on the books, they remain unenforced. This includes laws such as the California Housing Accountability Act (CHAA), an act that was designed to empower the State of California to limit the ability of local government to restrict the development of new housing. It was amended in 2017 to be more enforceable, and has therefore gained increased pushback in the form of legal challenges from local residents around California.

This has sparked new debates about the role of the state government, because though some claim the state has a mandate to reduce the homeless population, many claim that since local governments will have a better understanding of their land and how to use it, by stepping in, the state government is disturbing the balance of federalism in the state.

This debate will cover if these measures are worth the cost of the balance between the rights and powers of local governments and the state and whether these anti-NIMBY measures will actually produce the end result of a reduction of the homeless population if enacted.