Home Again OC: A Magazine on Homelessness

1

Table of Contents

4

6

HISTORY OF HOMELESSNESS TIMELINE

ENCAMPMENT BAN HISTORY AND LEGISLTION

6

11

ENCAMPMENT BAN HISTORY AND LEGISLTION

BEYOND THE SILVER SCREEN

13

14

ARTWORK: REACH ING THROUGH THE FRAGMENTS

LEADERS OF CHANGE

16

18

INTERACTIVE MAP

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS

20

22

STORIES OF HOPE

ENCAMPMENT BANS: MISGUIDED APPROACH

24 UNSEEN AND UNSTABLE

OUR MISSION At Home Again, we are dedicated to raising awareness about homelessness and advocating for meaningful, lasting solutions. Our mission is to empower individuals and families affected by homelessness by sharing their stories, fostering community understanding, and driving impactful change through education, advocacy, and support.

Our organization was born out of a response to the Newport Beach encampment bans, a turning point that highlighted the urgent need for compassionate and effective solutions to homelessness in our community. Seeing how these policies displaced vulnerable individuals and families, we felt compelled to act—to advocate for those who often go unheard and to challenge the stigma surrounding homelessness.

3

THE

HISTORY OF

Tim

HOMELESSNESS 1945-1970: Post-WWII Era and Urbanization Post-WWII urbanization and housing shortages displaced low-income communities, worsened by urban renewal and highway projects. The War on Poverty in the 1960s expanded social programs, yet systemic inequalities left marginalized groups, including minorities and veterans, especially vulnerable.

1929-1939: The Great Depression The Great Depression in the 1930s caused mass unemployment, with millions becoming homeless and creating shantytowns called "Hoovervilles." Federal programs like the New Deal’s U.S. Housing Act of 1937 marked the first significant government intervention to address homelessness.

4

1980s: Reagan Era and the Decline of Federal Support Federal housing cuts under the Reagan Administration led to a significant rise in homelessness, with around 3 million people affected annually. Advocacy organizations like the National Coalition for the Homeless emerged, and the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (1987) became the first federal legislation addressing homelessness.

meline 2000s: Economic Crises and Rising Housing Costs

The 2008 financial crisis caused widespread foreclosures, driving family homelessness to record levels. Programs like the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) and the Housing First model sought to address these challenges through preventive and long-term

2010s: Advocacy and Legal Milestones

Federal efforts, including Opening Doors, focused on ending veteran and chronic homelessness, achieving

significant reductions in both. The 2018 Martin v. City of Boise decision prohibited criminalizing homelessness when no shelter is available, setting a precedent for humane treatment.

solutions.

2020s: COVID-19 Pandemic and New Challenges The pandemic highlighted vulnerabilities in housing stability, with eviction moratoriums temporarily preventing mass displacement.

Federal measures like the American Rescue Plan provided emergency assistance, but housing costs and economic disparities continue to drive rising homelessness rates.

5

ENCAMPMENT BAN HISTORY AND LEGISLTION

By Meilin, Claire, and Taite When people talk about homelessness, they often mean “Homelessness”— a state where one is living on the street. In reality, homelessness encompasses a spectrum of unstable living conditions that jeopardize health, safety, and personal welfare, including those sleeping in cars, cycling through temporary accommodations, fleeing domestic violence, or “Approximately 90% of unhoused individuals displaced by encampment bans end up back on the streets," said Herring. "These bans perpetuate poverty."

teetering on the brink of eviction. Since the 1980s, the emergence of modern homelessness, correlating with the Reagan administration’s policies of deinstitutionalization for the mentally ill and slashed housing program budgets, has transformed a crisis of tens of thousands into a staggering epidemic of over half a million people. Far from a singular issue, homelessness is a multifaceted social challenge, deeply intertwined with socioeconomics, human rights, ethics, politics, and culture. Yet, in a world with global issues deemed more “urgent” or “solvable” dominate the public agenda, tackling the systemic roots of homelessness has grown increasingly difficult, allowing its numbers to steadily rise. People often advocate for homelessness to be addressed at its “root,” but it is evident now that over the years, cities have made increasing efforts to hide poverty from the rest of society.

6

On June 28th 2024, the Supreme Court justices ruled in a 6-3 decision that it is not “cruel and unusual” punishment for city officials to ban those experiencing homelessness for sleeping in public areas. This act, allowing cities in the United States now to ban homeless encampments, surprised everyone and alarmed many, including Assistant Professor of Sociology Chris Herring from UCLA. “Approximately 90% of unhoused individuals displaced by encampment bans end up back on the streets," said Herring. "These bans perpetuate poverty."

Moreover, unhoused individuals who do not evacuate encampments face arrest, leading to criminal records that hinder future opportunities for housing vouchers or employment, making it difficult to improve the quality of life.

While it is a commonplace for the Democratic perspective to defend a viewpoint similar to Herring’s, Governor Newsom of the blue state of California has actively supported this ban, issuing $1 billion in funding to clear encampments. Democratic swinging cities in California disagree with Newsom’s encouragement, stating that the ban is just “making the issue invisible,” exacerbating US homelessness rates 18% higher in 2024 since the past year, continuing with a clear upward trend. Conversely, Republican swinging cities tend to support the ban, claiming that this action is necessary for hygienic streets and will effectively force unhoused individuals into seeking resources such as non-profit organizations or government re-housing programs. However, the overcrowding of homeless shelters, coupled with unsanitary conditions and the cycle of individuals being repeatedly pushed back onto the streets, raises significant concerns about the well-being of unhoused individuals. This not only highlights a public health crisis but also underscores a moral issue in how society addresses homelessness.

But how did we reach the extent of this legislation and the increasing emphasis on enforcement rather than addressing systemic root causes? To grasp the underlying factors shaping the current approach to encampments, it is essential to examine the historical trajectory of legal rulings and their broader societal implications. The transition from Martin v. Boise to Pass v. Johnson represents a notable shift in addressing homelessness.

7 PHOTOGRAPHED BY BRADY LEE

In 2018, the United States Court of Appeals

their actions that impacted the larger community.

passed the Martin v. Boise ruling, stating that

Numerous cities and local governments have

cities cannot enforce anti-camping ordinances

demonstrated varying responses after the Martin

without sufficient facilities and resources for the

v Boise and Pass v Johnson rulings. Long Beach,

homeless population. This ruling implied that

California, spent time refining and creating

those sitting in, sleeping in, or lying in public

encampment programs and services in ‘focus

spaces have the right to do so if they do not have

areas,’ or areas already exposed to critical issues

anywhere else to go. However, the Martin v Boise

and disputes regarding homeless encampments

ruling did not mandate cities to establish new

and/or have received outreach services. In Long

shelters for the homeless population nor obligate

Beach’s strategy, the City’s Public Spaces

them to provide increased help. Moreover, cities

Workgroup took an interdepartmental approach

and local governments could still impose

to

reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions

problems,

for the homeless population.

department, Homeless Services Outreach, and

address

the

focus

areas’

homelessness

cooperating

with

the

police

other institutions such as the Emergency Despite the Martin v Boise ruling, the Supreme

Communications Center. Similarly, in Oregon,

Court recently passed a subsequent ruling, the

after the City of Grants ruling this year, there

Pass v. Johnson, which effectively overturned the

was a revisit to HB3115, a bill allowing homeless

decision made in Martin v. Boise. The City of

people to remain on public property if no shelters

Grants Pass v. Johnson ruling gave cities the right

are available, to make adjustments to the law.

to enforce laws and criminalize homeless

Hence, it abided by the new ruling and

individuals

Eighth

maintained established systems and policies

Amendment, which bans the government from

regarding the homeless population. For instance,

giving ‘cruel and unusual punishment’ to the

local

citizens. Amongst the various reasons behind this

restrictions and guidelines for the time, place,

ruling, one controversial explanation stands out:

and manner of regulations for encampments on

it

local

public property. After the Martin vs. Boise ruling

governments to remove and punish homeless

in some cities, like Seattle and Spokane Valley,

populations because the punishments are not

government officials modified their ordinance

‘cruel and unusual.’ The consequences may

plans to allow for greater homeless encampments

include short jail sentences and fines, which the

and transitional shelters set up in public spaces.

is

without

constitutional

Supreme

Court

violating

for

decided

cities

are

the

and

officials

in

Oregon

drafted

revised

‘reasonable’

consequences that do not infringe upon the

Regardless of how successfully or unsuccessfully

Eighth Amendment. In the end, nonetheless, the

different cities have responded to the most recent

ruling never clarified if it was constitutional for

Pass v. Johnson ruling, there is no doubt that

cities to give fines that homeless people could not

countless Supreme Court decisions are doing any

physically pay for. Another prominent reason

good to the homeless crisis in the United States,

behind this ruling was that cities enforcing anti-

especially in the West Coast. One cannot say

camping ordinance laws were not purposely

whether or not these rulings are requirements for

attacking a homeless person’s status, but rather

local governments or simply

8

‘incentivizing

acts’

that

specific

Time Count, San Joaquin County, bridging

discriminatory measures against the homeless

northern and central California, has taken

population. The federal passing of Grant Pass v

advantage of the recent federal ruling to push an

Johnson has enabled various responses from local

ordinance banning car sleeping and forcing

governments. With more than 100 US cities

unhoused individuals to move a minimum of 300

having already banned homeless encampments in

feet per hour. This ordinance aims to create

2024, predictions for future legislation foresee a

uncomfortable conditions for the homeless

continuation of the current pattern. The new

population in hopes of encouraging more

constraints are pervasive, present in both cities

appropriate living conditions, but research shows

and rural areas, and are not necessarily correlated

it will merely create temporary relief from

with the political orientation of the locality.

encampments and a cyclical process of unsettling

Cities have instituted bans in states such as New

the unhoused without permanent solutions. The

Hampshire, Oregon, Montana, Florida, and

City of San Diego passed an Unsafe Camping

Texas. California, the US state with the largest

Ordinance to begin on July 31, 2023 prohibiting

homeless

27.89

encampments on public property and codifying

percent of the national estimate according to

how, when and where the City may abate or

World

conduct enforcement related to violations of the

population,

provoke

accounting

for

regulations. The City outlines a scaled approach, Governor

Newsom’s

encouragement

of

targeting homeless encampments near schools

encampment bans coupled with the Supreme

and parks most significantly impacted by

Court’s ruling have led several California cities to

encampments. Regardless of shelter availability,

recently tighten their policies towards homeless

law enforcement must address violations under

encampments. After reporting a 104 percent

specific conditions including within two blocks

increase in homelessness in their 2024 Point-in-

of

PHOTOGRAPHED BY BRADY LEE

9

K-12 schools, within two blocks of a shelter, in city parks, and in any open space, waterway, or banks of a waterway.

However, despite trends illustrated in San Diego and San Joaquin County, California’s most impacted city, Los Angeles refrains from banning encampments. Instead, they plan to continue their pricy strategy of providing temporary housing in the form of hotel rooms until lasting accommodations become available. Other California cities threaten further restrictions such as Santa Monica which presently considers a ban on sleeping bags.

Disincentivizing encampments necessitates suitable resources and housing to sustain and support the homeless population – criteria many cities aren’t equipped to meet. Data from The Public Policy Institute of California, reflects that California’s shelters have the capacity to house 40% of the homeless population, leaving the excess 60% without shelter or support from their local governments.

Therefore, a statewide ban of encampments would criminalize homelessness and displace at least 100,000 individuals.

California exemplifies a national trend of encampment bans despite a lack of affordable housing and available necessities for the unhoused.

Local governments across the United States are now instating new laws and ordinances against their homeless populations. By neglecting to confront the root of homelessness and, instead, further drown those affected with the burdens of arrests, fines, and constant displacement, the spreading of encampment bans may prove detrimental to mending the homeless crisis. With officials veiling the broader plight of homelessness through temporary movement of homeless individuals and further restrictions, one can safely expect an increase in the unhoused population as necessary support is further delayed by the federal government’s inaction and inability to protect its unhoused citizens.

10 PHOTOGRAPHED BY BRADY LEE

BEYOND THE SILVER SCREEN : CA’S HOUSING CRISIS

BY SARAH HUANG When viewers tune into "The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills," they can see sweeping shots of oceanfront estates and sprawling Mediterranean-style mansions overlooking the California coastline.

These shows, movies, and music in popular media have helped cement Southern California's reputation as a realm of luxury and extravagance. Yet beyond these carefully curated images of wealth lies a profoundly different reality for millions of California residents. The same communities that serve as backdrops for reality television are grappling with one of the nation's most severe housing crises.

THE CRISIS While entertainment media showcases the state's most exclusive properties, an unprecedented housing shortage has pushed even middle-income families to the brink of housing insecurity. The state currently faces a deficit of 3.5 million (around 26% of California’s housing stock) housing units, affecting not just lowincome communities but also professionals, young families, and longtime residents.

This crisis, which began to accelerate in the early 2000s, reached critical levels following the 2008 financial crisis when new constructions plummeted while population growth continued. Between 2010 and 2020, California added only one new housing unit for every five new residents, significantly below the necessary ratio to maintain housing stability.

Policy failures and local attitudes have intensified these issues. The government has continuously underfunded public housing programs and attempts to implement housing policies that favor lower-incomes have often faced local opposition. One example is restrictive zoning laws, particularly single-family zoning regulations. These restrictions prevent the construction of multi-family housing units in many California's cities. While many wealthy residents see single-family zoning as a beneficial tool for protecting property values and maintaining public safety, it has been historically associated with increased rates of segregation and continues to widen the socioeconomic divide. Although single-family zoning has been banned in 2022 by Governor Newsom, the effects of this policy can still be seen in California’s exclusive suburban neighborhoods.

Economic factors have further complicated the situation. Real estate speculation and housing as an investment vehicle have driven up property values. This often priced out local residents and converted once affordable housing units into luxury developments or short-term rentals. This has disconnected home prices from local incomes, creating markets that primarily serve investors rather than residents. A related phenomenon is the process of

gentrification, in which wealthier residents move into a historically low-income neighborhood, changing the characteristics of the neighborhood and driving vulnerable populations away. As the neighborhood becomes “upgraded” in a sense, original residents find themselves no longer able to afford to live there and in danger of displacement.

HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS The affordable housing gap serves as a direct cause of homelessness. In California's urban areas, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles, renters need to earn much more than the minimum wage to afford the market-rate apartment. This disparity between wages and housing costs has created an impossible situation for residents.

Evictions play a crucial role in this crisis. Despite recent efforts to strengthen tenant protections, many California residents remain vulnerable to displacement.

The absence of strong rent control measures in many cities leaves tenants exposed to sudden rent increases that can lead to eviction.

At the end of the day, vulnerable populations bear the brunt of this crisis. Single parents, particularly single mothers, face some of the highest rates of housing insecurity. Senior citizens on fixed incomes, low-wage workers, and individuals with disabilities are also disproportionately affected. For these groups, the loss of housing often marks the beginning of a difficult journey through homelessness, with limited options for regaining stability. Once homeless, it becomes incredibly difficult for individuals to regain housing stability.

CONCLUSION So, while popular media continues to showcase California's most extravagant residences, the true story of the state's housing future is being written not in hillside mansions, but in city council meetings, community forums, and state legislative sessions. The contrast between the California of entertainment media and the lived experience of millions of residents serves as a powerful reminder that addressing the housing crisis requires looking beyond facades to implement meaningful solutions. Recent developments offer chances for hope. The state has begun to take decisive action through legislation that streamlines housing development and strengthens tenant protections.

Moreover, growing public awareness has fostered a new sense of urgency and purpose among policymakers and the local community.

12

REACHING THROUGH THE FRAGMENTS This artwork illustrates the cyclical nature of poverty and the struggle to break free from its grasp. The figure's upward-reaching hands symbolize a yearning for hope and opportunity, while the surrounding torn materials, discarded objects, and muted tones represent the weight of economic hardship and societal neglect. The fragmented collage pieces evoke the shattered dreams and barriers that entrap individuals in poverty, emphasizing how systemic challenges make the cycle difficult to escape. Yet, the light reflected in the subject's expression conveys resilience and the persistent search for a brighter future.

13

Natalie B. is the Homeless Services Manager for the City of Newport Beach, bringing over five years of experience in this role and a demonstrated commitment to addressing homelessness through tailored, communityfocused solutions. Since September 2019, she has led efforts to house individuals, connect them to essential services, and evaluate the impacts of policies like Newport Beach’s October encampment ban. Natalie emphasizes the importance of city-specific approaches, noting that solutions effective in one community may not work universally. With a deep understanding of Newport Beach's homeless population—documented at 32 individuals in the most recent point-in-time count—Natalie works closely with the city’s homelessness liaison officer and regional partners in Huntington Beach and Costa Mesa to monitor progress and provide comprehensive support.

NATALIE BASMACIYAN

Chris Herring, an Assistant Professor of Sociology at UCLA, focuses his research on poverty, housing, and homelessness in U.S. cities, with work published in leading academic journals and prominent media outlets like The Washington Post and The New York Times. He is writing an ethnography on the criminalization of homelessness in San Francisco and studying Ban the Box policies with Harvard's Sandra Smith. A proponent of public sociology, Herring has co-directed participatory action research projects, worked with organizations like the San Francisco Coalition on Homelessness, and served as a researcher for the city's Mayor's Office on Homelessness. He teaches courses on urban sociology, poverty, punishment, and ethnographic methods, and strongly advocates for the Housing First approach, which his research identifies as the most effective solution to homelessness. Herring holds a PhD in Sociology from UC Berkeley, an MA

CHRIS HERRING

in Social Anthropology, and a BA in Economics, and previously worked as a project manager in New York City's Department of Housing Preservation and Development.

14

Mitchell Raff is the founder and director of Clothing the Homeless (CTH), a nonprofit organization dedicated to serving Orange County's homeless population through a mobile clothing distribution system. Since taking ownership of CTH in 2016 from Journey Church, Mitchell has led the organization as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, driven by his unwavering commitment to dignity, compassion, and support for those less fortunate. Under his leadership, CTH distributes over 1,200 clothing items monthly to individuals in need across Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, Riverside, and Anaheim, ensuring accessibility without the barriers of vouchers or transportation. With an allvolunteer team and partnerships with other service organizations, Mitchell has created a holistic approach to meeting the needs of the homeless community. His mission reflects a belief in the transformative power of respect and kindness, and he invites others to join in supporting this humane and impactful cause.

MITCHELL RAFF

Allen Burnett, MTS, serves as the Community Engagement Manager at Project Hope Alliance (PHA), bringing a deep passion for supporting children and families affected by homelessness. Joining the PHA development team in 2022, Allen holds a degree from UC Santa Cruz and an M.A. in Theology from Vanguard University. With a career rooted in serving children, he previously owned and operated childcare facilities for working families living at the poverty line and served as a youth minister at Second Baptist Church of Santa Ana, where he continues to volunteer.

Allen is committed to PHA's mission of ending the cycle of homelessness one child at a time by addressing the unique challenges that prevent children from reaching their full potential. Through PHA’s innovative on-site intervention model, Allen works to build stronger communities by ensuring homeless youth have access to the resources, mentorship, and educational support they need to thrive.

ALLEN BURNETT

15

1. 2019 PIT count: 63 unsheltered 2. 2024 PIT count: 71 unsheltered (increase of 11% or 8 individuals) 58 arrests and 10 issued citations, fielded 154 calls for service involving homeless individuals

Street Exits: Year-to-date(Jan 1 to Dec 31, 2024): 163 street exits (95 to shelters) Quarterly (10/1-12/31/2024): 15 street exits (6 to shelters)

2019 Point-in-Time Count: 1,769 homeless individuals in Santa Ana. 2024 Point-in-Time Count: 1,428 homeless individuals in Santa Ana (a reduction of 341 or 19%).

STAY NOTIFIED ON HOMELESSNESS UPDATES ON HOMEAGAINOC.ORG

THE INTERACTIVE DATA MAP Street Exits from Mercy House: 33 total shelter guests housed 14 exited to permanent housing 19 exited to temporary housing or specialized treatment facilities (e.g. psychiatric substance use, medical)

Amount of permanent housing units 2919 units - very low income (0-50% of County Median Family income) 1794 units - Low income (51-80% of County MFI) 2088 units - Moderate income (81-120% of County MFI) 4959 units - Above moderate income (120% or more of County MFI)

Driving through the outskirts of the Hollywood Walk of Fame, I peer through the car’s backseat window. Along the concrete sidewalks were numerous homeless encampments, tightly compacted together with tens of unhoused individuals lining the street. As a child, I was often told a blanket statement that homelessness is a result of one’s own reckless choices. In hand with that, many individuals regard the unhoused population as dangerous—a forgotten community hidden away from the rest of society.

Overpoweringly, people often have the notion that homelessness is labeled as something that does not happen “in my backyard” or the NIMBY ideology. Applied to the homelessness crisis, the ideology “not in my backyard” also commonly known as “beggarthy-neighbor,” perpetuates the misconception that individuals experiencing homelessness only belong in the underserved and economically challenged areas of a city. This viewpoint, an ignorant view of reality, disregards the fact that avoidance of the homelessness crisis worsens the situation. NIMBY is often rooted in concerns about property values, safety, or social environment and dynamics. Many supporters of “not in my backyard” prevent the construction and development of shelters and affordable housing in their immediate vicinity. In The Daily Economy, the concerns of many NIMBYers “show stronger opposition to new construction, even when that new construction would benefit them according to their own beliefs” so they aim to “[maintain] the status quo” which clearly intensifies the housing crisis.

Furthermore, these individuals “worry that new housing developments in their communities threaten their way of life,” such as their prediction that the influx of people from different backgrounds

could

potentially

shift

the

demographic

BY TERESA Z UO

distribution of the schools NIMBYers’ kids attend. The ironic phrase of “not in my backyard” raises the question: if not in your backyard, then where?

The

basis

of

arguments

against

programs

to

alleviate

homelessness and the wider development of transitional housing often is a result of the misconception that homelessness is primarily caused by drug addiction and mental illness.

However, the reality of the situation of most unhoused people is just an economic one: racial inequality in employment, skyrocketing housing prices, and the difficulty in attaining government aid often impact the ability to afford housing. For instance, there is on average at least 100% growth in California home prices in the past 10 years. Among the homeless individuals sheltered and in the labor force, there is approximately 15% unemployed, which could be potentially due to the economic changes and fluctuation of shelter resources.

While homelessness can make people more susceptible to addiction and mental illness, which can catalyze a seemingly inescapable cycle of poverty, it is often not the sole cause. Interestingly, what underlies unhoused individual’s involvement in drug addiction is often the dehumanization of the population. The public would much rather ignore the humanity of unhoused people and present them as people without complex emotions and stories. Labeling them as drug addicts and dangerous people eliminates any empathy for them and creates the narrative that they do not deserve respect and humane treatment.

Interconnected with the dehumanization of homeless people, many people falsely believe that unhoused people do not maximize the utility of their resources. However, when given direct financial support, most people spend money on housing and food. Every night, hundreds to thousands of people wait in line to get into a shelter and can't. A survey done in Los Angeles indicates that when these unhoused individuals are given the option of a congregate shelter, 30% of those on the street would say yes. Additionally, pilot programs show a high success rate when people are trusted with these resources.

As

the

media

and

public

perpetuate

harmful

misconceptions and stereotypes about homelessness, the best anyone can do is to educate themselves and check their biases.

19

ZUPRIMNA Zuprimna is a resilient mother of four whose strength has carried her through some of life’s toughest challenges. After being in an abusive household, she fell into homelessness.

Though the journey has been difficult, Zuprimna’s determination never wavered. Today, she is fighting for custody of her children, striving to provide them with the stability and love they deserve. Despite struggling to afford rent, she remains committed to overcoming every obstacle in her path. Zuprimna is a shining example of hope of new beginnings

CLARK DAVID INGLISH Clark David Inglish experienced homelessness in both Orange County and Los Angeles County during his transgender coming out journey, the birth of his child, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite these challenges, he overcame substance abuse, retained custody of his child in court, and is pursuing college education after securing permanent housing through a voucher program. Clark emphasizes that stable housing is the foundation for a remake of one's life, asserting that only a secure, permanent home— one with four walls and a roof—creates the stability necessary for meaningful personal transformation. read it.

PHOTOGRAPHED BY JENNY LI & DYLAN HAN

MARCUS HULBERT Marcus Hulbert fell into the cycle of homelessness after undergoing dozens of medical procedures, one of which led to the amputation of his left leg. A Newport Beach native, he had previously moved to Las Vegas, sacrificing his career as an insurance broker to care for a close friend. However, after his friend’s passing, he was forced out of the home, leaving him without stability. In 2024, with the support of Natalie B from the Newport Beach City Council, Marcus secured permanent housing in Costa Mesa. His message to others is one of resilience—no matter how much you lose, there is always a path forward, and a chance to rebuild.

PHOTOGRAPHED BY JONATHAN YE

21

ENCAMPMENT BANS: MISGUIDED APPROACH

Regarding this growing trend of implementing encampment bans, the proponent side of city officials believe it positively aids public safety concerns, increases neighborhood aesthetics, addresses community complaints, and encourages homeless individuals to seek shelter at “more appropriate” locations. As the homeless are being removed from public spaces, citizens feel more at ease without having to worry about potential crimes.

Businesses can also operate better as the overall appearance improves drastically without people camping nearby.

Property value also increases along with the cleaner environment.

Thus, many complaints from residents or businesses are addressed by the encampment bans, which further emphasize and portray the government’s support towards citizens’ concerns.

Nevertheless, opponents argue that encampment bans have no actual effects on addressing homelessness. There hasn’t been a decrease in the percentage of homelessness as 90% of the people are driven away from their shelters to avoid arrest. Many of these individuals are forced to relocate and camp in other locations, which doesn’t thoroughly solve the problem of homelessness.

Furthermore, there is a shortage of homes in the United States due to the increase in inflation. 8090% of the homeless people would take getting off the streets for shelter inside a hotel, 60% would take a tiny house, and 30% would like congregate shelter. Yet, there is still a shortage of shelter for the homeless. Politicians implement the criminalization of homelessness under the assumption that there are plenty of shelters available and can accommodate homeless people if only laws are implemented. However, this isn’t the case because sometimes these shelters aren’t available solutions or they won’t work for serving as temporary homes to the homeless.

PHOTOGRAPHED BY JENNY LI

By Linda Liu In June 2024, the Supreme Court declared encampment bans as not breaching the Eighth Amendment, which allows and frees more municipalities from applying these laws.

Encampment bans are laws that prevent people from camping in public properties. People are forced to leave areas they have settled in such as spaces like parks despite these individuals being homeless or unable to provide for themselves. However, these bans are increasingly implemented in the United States and California has 14 or more cities that have prohibited public camping.

22

This lack of shelter serves as a key problem when

Johnson case added that using a blanket or pillow

addressing the homelessness issue since many safe

while lying down wasn’t allowed. Furthermore, the

cities don’t offer these accommodations. As a

citations

result, homeless individuals have to travel to designated places to receive these types of

they receive and can’t pay off prevent them from

accessibilities. For example, many want to settle in

accessing services, and due to people being

safe neighborhoods in Irvine, but there are

criminalized for temporarily lingering in public

insufficient shelters, nonprofit organizations, and

spaces, access to housing and jobs becomes harder.

shower stations in these locations. Another

While the law is pushing people towards housing,

instance is in Newport Beach, where there are 71

these people are simultaneously being blocked

unhoused people with zero shelter beds. An effect

from this access because they are continuously

of transferring these vulnerable populations to

criminalized. This cycle perpetuates the dire states

distant locations is that some of these destinations

that homeless individuals are in by making

have even worse conditions and are away from

reintegration more difficult.

their usual and familiar circle, which they receive support at times. Many of these designated

Finally, there are psychological and social

shelters also have limited policies such as no pets

consequences for the homeless. They receive

allowed or having to split family members which

much

only exacerbate their situation and state.

complaints that reduce their dignity which is

unwanted

PHOTOGRAPHED BY JENNY LI

worsened

by

the

attention,

criticism,

criminalization

from

and the

Aside from the availability of shelters, 42% of the

encampment ban. Aside from that, it also disrupts

homeless people forced to leave public spaces

social networks as well as support systems. Many

have had their personal belongings taken, 70%

people choose to turn a blind eye to those in need.

received citations, and many were being filed

As these people experience biased treatment, get

complaints at. As a result of their belongings

complaints that reduce their chances of housing or

being taken, they also lose their ID, which is

job, get branded with criminal records, and receive

important for shelter, and further endangers those

employment with insufficient pay their conditions

individual’s

decrease while getting worse because of more

chances

for

future

source

of

residency. Nevertheless, shelters only serve as

biased complaints, and they start to lose hope.

temporary solutions. Most of the time, many who do live in these shelters have to spend the day

There is still much more to be done to understand

outside. Without any financial resources, the

the complex nature of homelessness. It isn’t a

majority are left to stay in public spaces, which

simple matter that a few laws passed by authorities

they still get complaints about because they have

can completely solve. Many different factors have

nowhere else to go. An extreme situation is in Los

to be considered and more effort from the people

Angeles, where there are laws that prevent people

above has to be given to see a real decrease in

from sitting down on sidewalks unless they’re

homeless populations. There needs to be more

watching a parade. The Martin vs. Boise case

advocacy for comprehensive, supportive solutions

allowed people to lie down in the streets if there

and a call for evidence-based humane approaches

wasn’t available shelter, while the Grants Pass v.

in order to see real change.

23

PHOTOGRAPHED BY BRADY LEE

UNSEEN AND UNSTABLE The Homelessness struggle of Foster Youth in California

By Jayla Chan As of 2024, an estimated 187,000+ people in California experience homelessness; in other words, 0.48% of the total population— one of the highest per capita rates in the US. What's more, California’s homeless population is disproportionately represented by various minorities, including black and hispanic men and women, with a particular subset gaining attention within recent years alongside the development of the American child welfare system—foster youth.

Statistics show that within California alone, 2531% of transition-aged foster youth (TAF), or foster youth between the ages of 18-21, experience homelessness, particularly after being emancipated from the foster care system, or aging out. A clear disproportion can be seen when comparing to the general young-adult population, approximately 10% of which face

homelessness. There is, however, no nationally agreed-upon figure for the rates of housing insecurity among foster youth due to the varying definitions of homelessness across states and even counties. Using definitions that encompass “couch surfing” as a common alternative to shelters, however, will often result in much higher estimates of youth homelessness.

In Orange county in particular, around 4% of the nearly 7,000 people experiencing

homelessness are TAF—a disproportionate figure when considering the fact that current and previous foster youth make up less than 0.5% of the total population in Orange County, with current foster youth sitting a little above 0.1%. Studies have shown that risk factors for homelessness—including having a history of childhood physical and/or sexual abuse, mental health disorders, drug usage, involvement in the juvenile justice system, lack of permanent connections to an adult, and lower educational levels—are particularly prevalent in foster youth. This can be seen in the 50% high school graduation rate for foster youth compared to the 87% national average, the mere 3% who have a college diploma in comparison to the 67% nationally, and the overall higher rates of juvenile delinquency and mental health issues, particularly PTSD, among foster children both before and during placement.

Within the past few years, there have been efforts by the local government to address the homelessness issue in OC with particular consideration given to high-risk groups such as TAF. As of 2022, the Orange County Continuum of Care, which independently oversees the distribution of county funding for homeless programs, funds a shelter specially designated for TAF with 25 beds in collaboration with the Orangewood Foundation, although the waiting list for beds is said to be up to nine months long. Currently, much of the local efforts to combat homelessness for foster and at-risk youth are supported by collaborative NGOs and local non-profit organizations by targeting risk factors such as education and mental health. Orangewood foundation, based in Santa Ana, provides housing and mentorship programs that help foster youth who have aged out of the system with no support gain needed life skills and employment opportunities, in addition to educational resources and scholarships. Scholarship Prep, a public charter school in Santa Ana, provides essential resources including food provisions, trauma-trained teachers, counseling, and educational supplies for foster and homeless youth. There are also various grassroots student-led initiatives that aim to support local foster youth, including the FOSTERing positivity initiative at Sage Hill School, and the Orphan Assistance Fund, which has 20+ chapters across Orange County.

25

Meet

Our Team

Home Again Team

Writers

Meilin Shen Sarah Huang Jianing Li

Teresa Zuo, Jayla Chan, Taite Nicholson, Sarah Huang

Photographers Brady Lee, Jonathan Ye, Jianing Li

26

Editors’ Note Dear Readers, We would like to express great appreciation for the dedication, tireless research, and passionate writing of our team members that has culminated in an issue we are particularly proud of. Additionally, we are so grateful for the collaborative efforts of Professor Chris Herring, Natalie Basmaciyan, Mitchel Raff, Aaron Burnett, Zuprimna, Clark Inglish, and Marcus Hubert. Without their help and willingness to share their story, this issue would not have been possible. Also, deep thanks to Ms. Teryn Bentley for helping us in each step of our project.

In this issue of the Giver’s Guide X Home Again, we turn our focus to a critical and growing crisis: homelessness.

Creating this edition has been a deeply moving and eyeopening journey, as we’ve listened to stories of resilience, hardship, and hope. These voices have guided the heart of this publication, reminding us of the humanity behind the statistics. We invite you to join us in reflecting on these stories and the larger systemic challenges they illuminate.

Thank you for reading and for your willingness to engage in this important conversation.

Warm Regards,

May Shen, Sarah Huang, Jenny Li 27