In a significant policy shift aimed at tackling homelessness, the San Jose City Council has approved a measure that could potentially lead to the arrest of homeless individuals who decline offers of shelter multiple times. By a vote of 9-2, the council endorsed an addition to the city’s encampment code of conduct, known as the “responsibility to shelter” provision. This new policy seeks to encourage those living in tents along streets to accept available shelter accommodations. It is also intended to uphold standards such as bans on pitching tents near schools or playgrounds and blocking public pathways.
This initiative, spearheaded by San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, is particularly notable given the city’s progressive reputation within the liberal San Francisco Bay Area. It stands as one of the more stringent measures proposed by elected officials following the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to facilitate the banning of homeless encampments on public properties. The new policy reflects growing frustration over the presence of makeshift campsites and the erratic behavior attributed to drug use or mental distress, amid the state’s housing crisis that affects approximately 187,000 individuals. California accounts for roughly a quarter of the nation’s homeless population.
Despite the severity of the measure, Mayor Mahan emphasizes that most unhoused individuals do accept shelter when offered. He expresses the desire for a shift in attitude, expecting accountability as the city progresses in expanding shelter and interim housing options. “I think we need a cultural change, a culture of accountability for everyone involved,” noted Mahan. He insists that the aim is not to criminalize vulnerability but to use legal avenues as a last resort.
State politics also intersect with this local initiative, as Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom advocates for citywide bans on encampments. Arguing against outdoor habitation, San Francisco’s rising arrest rates for illegal lodging underscore this stance. However, this approach has drawn criticism from homeless advocates who assert that dismantling encampments can be both traumatizing and counterproductive, further destabilizing individuals who might lose critical documents needed for jobs and housing applications.
Opposition to the policy stems from several quarters, including Santa Clara County leadership. Otto Lee, President of the county’s Board of Supervisors, criticized the move, describing it as inhumane and inefficient for those with mental health or addiction issues. He, along with other leaders, calls for increased housing resources and services rather than punitive measures. City Council member Pamela Campos, one of the two votes against the policy, argued that the responsibility falls unjustly on individuals rather than addressing systemic issues contributing to homelessness.
Importantly, the policy itself does not mandate immediate arrest after three shelter rejections. Mayor Mahan indicated that discretion will play a crucial role, with law enforcement and outreach workers having flexibility to assess situations. Notably, San Jose intends to establish a six-officer team within the police department focused on improving quality of life. The policy outlines options such as referral to detox centers or court-mandated treatment for repeated code violations related to psychiatric or substance use disorders.
Despite the ambitions behind this policy, the city acknowledges the shortage of shelter availability. San Jose currently has nearly 1,400 shelter spots, with plans to add 800 more by year-end. Mayor Mahan has assured that individuals will not face punishment if sufficient or suitable accommodation is unavailable. City Council member David Cohen, who voted in favor, urges realistic expectations, noting that addressing the ongoing challenges posed by homeless encampments will require sustained efforts over the coming years. “People need to be prepared for the fact that it will take years,” he stated, cautioning against expecting immediate solutions.