Lately, some mean-spirited, self-informed people have been writing to tell me I’m crazy, stupid and insane. They don’t like it that I’m advocating Nevada County’s proposed alternative housing ordinance.
(Self-informed means they believe what they want to believe despite all evidence to the contrary.)
The ordinance is not “inviting homeless to the area and allowing them to live in tents and rv’s parked where ever they want,” as one of my critics wrote. Tents aren’t even mentioned in the ordinance, and RVs & trailers can’t park wherever they want.
Another writer authoritatively told me without proof, “Most of the homeless come from other areas, not local folk at all.” – This is absolutely not true. Most of our homeless are local. They grew up here, they work here, and/or they have family here.
It’s an insidious and persistent myth that large numbers of homeless people migrate. Most stay in the community where they became homeless.
The truth is that the ordinance would permit certain property owners in unincorporated Nevada County to rent out a county-inspected-and-approved trailer or trailer space to people who cannot find or afford any other housing during this national homeless/housing crisis.
It’s also true that many property owners already do this illegally anyway.
vindication
I don’t like being unkindly and unfairly criticized by people who don’t even know me. Who does?
So, I was especially gratified to learn last Friday that I will receive the 36th annual Col. Bill Lambert Award by the Famous Marching Presidents of Nevada City.
I know, admire and respect many of the past Lambert recipients. I am particularly honored to join such past winners as legendary local homeless advocates Utah Phillips, Joanna Robinson and Cindy Maple who created Hospitality House, Nevada County’s primary homeless shelter. I started out as a volunteer for Hospitality House in 2010.
As someone who survived the protests and riots of the 1960s, I have to say what’s happening today is far worse. We citizens must exercise our rights and responsibilities to remove those in power who have forsworn their sacred oaths to “protect and defend” the Constitution of the United States of America.
What’s happening to the Constitutional rights of our homeless citizens in Washington, D.C., is shameless and inexcusable. What’s happening to the Constitution itself is shameless and inexcusable.
Therefore, Sunday afternoon, Sept. 21, I will proudly limp down Broad Street for the 38th annual Constitution Day parade with the Marching Presidents.
And I’ll see you Monday, Sept. 1, at 11 a.m. in the Brunswick Basin for the Labor Day “Workers over Billionaires” protest and food drive.
Reality Check
The difference between the ordinance skeptics and the No Place To Go Project is that we see a problem and offer a solution. The skeptics see the solution as the problem.
By opposing the ordinance, the skeptics are choosing to maintain the status quo.
Apparently, they’re willing to let our homeless/houseless crisis continue to get worse. According to the county, five more people become homeless locally every month.
Apparently, the skeptics would rather keep the wildfire risk of people living in the woods as well as garbage and human waste polluting our environment.
Apparently, they’d rather have houseless people parking wherever they can than let them have a safe place to live.
What the ordinance skeptics fail to realize is that the people and trailers who they claim will “ruin” the community are already here. There will be no homeless invasion.
As I read the ordinance, it’s just a paper tiger. Nobody’s going to want to comply because of all the fees, requirements and repeated inspections. Landlords and tenants will continue take their chances below the county’s radar.
The main effect of the ordinance will probably be to give Code Compliance the authority to force people to come into compliance after somebody has anonymously complained about an existing trailer or new placement.
I’m okay with that. It beats forcing people to move because of zoning violations when there is no place to go, which is the current situation.
Ordinance amendments
Because the alternative housing ordinance is so expensive and restrictive, I told the Board of Supervisors Tuesday during public comments, “We have amendments.”
Here are some, but not all, of the modifications to the ordinance the No Place To Go Project is proposing:
C.1. Establishes an “RV dwelling administrative development permit” renewable every two years for an unspecified fee, including an inspection. … That’s a nonstarter for both tenants and property owners. Who wants to pay to be inspected every two years? One and done.
C.5.a. An RV AltDU (alternative dwelling unit) may not be rented for less than 30 days. … The intent of this ordinance is to provide long-term housing for local people, not tourists. We suggest not less than 90 days.
C.6. An RV AltDU is only allowable on property that is three acres or greater, along with other restrictions. … The idea is to create more housing. One acre.
C.10. Prevents RV AltDU owners from taking the wheels off. … Taking the wheels off would convert an RV AltDU to an ADU (accessory dwelling unit) under federal Department of Housing & Urban Development standards. Low-income tenants could then qualify for rental assistance from federal Housing Choice Vouchers (aka Section 8). Allow RV AltDUs to remove their wheels.
As much as we would like to see the ordinance amended to improve affordability and availability, we want this ordinance to pass this year as planned.
If an amendment is approved but would require more time to write into the regulations (for instance, taking the wheels off ), the ordinance should pass without the amendments but with the codified agreement to implement the amended regulations by a date certain.
what’s next
The Nevada County Community Development Agency conducted a nonscientific survey to assess public opinion on the ordinance.
One thousand nine hundred twenty (1,920) people responded to the survey. Seventy-two percent (72%) of respondents favored the ordinance; 80% did not want it to be a temporary solution; and 55% did not want the ordinance to be used for short-term rentals.
To see the complete results of the survey and other important information, please visit www.nevadacountyca.gov/4102/AlternativeRV-Housing.
The first public workshop on the ordinance is scheduled for 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 9, at the Grass Valley Veterans Hall. Even though the survey results are promising, it is extremely important that No Place To Go Project supporters of the ordinance show up and speak up at the workshop.
We must also send thoughtful written comments to AltRVOrdinance@NevadaCountyCa.gov by Sept. 22.
After several more public hearings and the Planning Commission, it was confirmed at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting that the ordinance will come up for consideration by the supervisors on Nov. 4.
If the ordinance skeptics want to use misinformation, fearmongering and insults to make their case, that’s their prerogative. But, as I told one of my detractors, saying mean and outrageous things might make you feel better, but it’s neither persuasive nor effective.
As we did successfully last year for Title 25 housing and tiny homes on wheels, the supporters of the No Place To Go Project must be polite, persistent and relentlessly reasonable.
Tom Durkin is the director of the No Place To Go Project, a creative social justice advocacy for low-income and homeless people. He may be contacted at tom@noplacetogoproject.com or www.noplacetogoproject.com.