“Bars on windows are a sign that I am in the wrong neighborhood.” I heard that a few times when I was a kid, mostly from people of my parents’ generation. It was not intended as disparagement of any particular neighborhood. It meant that relocation was a better option than installation of bars on windows.
I do not remember that anyone who said that actually relocated. Situations just never got that bad. Bars appeared on windows of a few businesses in some neighborhoods, but were eventually removed as people realized that the neighborhoods were not so bad.
Besides, some believed that bars on windows just informed potential burglars that there was something worth stealing within. Others believed that there was not much within their homes that burglars would be interested in. I believed that if a burglar wanted something within my isolated home, that bars would not stop him or her from taking it.
Most of us choose to not live in fear. We happen to live in an excellent place, and intend to enjoy it. It is certainly not perfect, and burglaries sometimes happen. We just do not allow such unpleasantries to dictate our lifestyles.
Those who choose to live in fear have the option of relocating to someplace where they do not need to live in fear. If they fear crime, they can go someplace where there is no crime. If they fear drugs, they can go someplace where there are none. If they fear houseless people, and believe that houseless people migrate to this region, they can relocate to someplace that is unpopular with the migratory houseless people whom they fear. Surely, there must be a place like that for them to go to. It is more practical than expecting those they fear to relocate for them.
There are more people who lack domestic situations in California than in any other state. Well, that should be obvious. There are more people in California than in any other state. 12% of all Americans live here. Even if the rate of houselessness were the same here as it is in other states, 12% of those who are houseless in American would live here. That is a significant number!
Since the rate of houselessness here is approximately double that of the rest of America, approximately 24% of those who are houseless in American should reside in California, although the actual ratio is approximately 22%.
This is not because houseless people migrate to California. More of the unhoused live in or near their hometowns than those who live within homes. Although the primary causes of houselessness are similar, albeit to various degrees, for most regions of America, the main difference is the cost of housing.
Homes and rents are ridiculously expensive here. It is extremely difficult for those who lose a home to procure another. If houselessness is the result of unemployment, it is very difficult for someone who lacks a domestic situation to procure new employment in order to procure a new domestic situation!
Recovery from houselessness is not nearly as difficult in other regions, even with significantly less income. Furthermore, since mortgages and rents are more affordable, it is not nearly as difficult to maintain a stable domestic situation in order to avoid becoming houseless. Many who live in poverty here can afford to directly purchase a home in other regions.
Not many houseless people migrate to California. More migrate from California to live in homes elsewhere. Unfortunately, they are replaced by more Californians who become houseless. Many prefer to stay in their respective home regions rather than migrate.
Derived from a misspelling and bad grammar, it is a fictitious place of the Peanuts comics. According to Charlie Brown, ‘Chateau du Mal Voisin’ translates from French into ‘Chateau of the Bad Neighbor’. Regardless of questionable syntax, it, in one form or another, is something that most of us can identify with.
The Chateau du Mal Voisin of the illustration here is fortunately not local. It is at the southeastern corner of the interchange of South Cochran Avenue and Venice Boulevard, just west of the Mid City district of Los Angeles. The picture was taken last December. The Chateau has been expanded extensively since then. Not only is it now larger than some of the two bedroom apartments on West Cologne Street in the background, but it has a spacious yard, a parking space for the occupant’s sedan, an ornate wrought iron security door, and, of all things, a mailbox. No building permits were issued. The resident pays neither a mortgage nor rent to live in this expensive neighborhood.
Those who do pay either a mortgage or rent to live here pay too much to contend with this in their neighborhood. Locally generated tax revenue is more than adequate to prevent this from happening, even if such prevention were to involve assuming the expense of providing more socially acceptable accommodations for the houseless. To be brutally blunt, this is unacceptable.
This certainly should not imply that the Community is not concerned for their houseless members. Like our local Community, the Mid City Los Angeles Community is remarkably generous and gracious in regard to helping their houseless neighbors improve their respective situations. In fact, that is what makes this Chateau du Mal Voisin so intolerable. It expresses a complete lack of appreciation for the graciousness of the Community.
Technically, people should not inhabit public spaces. The houseless do so only because they lack other options. Most attempt to be discrete and respectful of the Community, just as most of the Community is so respectfully accommodating and tolerant.
A Chateau du Mal Voisin such as this certainly confounds tolerance.
Many people lost their homes to the CZU Fire last summer.
A few homes were damaged or destroyed by trees and debris that were blown down by strong winds early last week.
Before all the damage could be repaired, and all the mess and clogged drainage could be mitigated, the rain started.
Now, an evacuation warning has been issued because wind and rain predicted for Tuesday night is likely to cause debris flows and perhaps flooding within or downstream from areas affected by the CZU Fire.
It seems to be so unfair that homes, which we expect to be reasonably safe and secure, can be so vulnerable.
We all know the risks associated with living here, but such risks do not often affect so many within such a short time.
In fact, the CZU Fire was the most destructive fire in local history, and involved the most significant evacuations.
Those of us who lack homes must contend with the risks associated with living here as well. Just as rain is a problem for anyone who can not repair a damaged roof in a timely manner, it is a problem for anyone who lacks a roof. The current evacuation warning is unlikely to affect locations inhabited by those who lack homes, but flooding of creeks or the San Lorenzo River might.
Most of those who had recently been deprived of their homes have fortunately procured residency elsewhere, even if just temporarily. Very few lack adequate shelter here. Of those who do, some inhabit sites that are close to water. Those who are in situations that will likely be inundated as creeks and the San Lorenzo River rise need to relocate. This will not be easy in the rain.
Fortunately, rain is not predicted for tomorrow (Monday).
(Apologies for the delay of posting this recycled article from last year. It could not be reblogged, so got reposted, . . . . or whatever happened.)
Michael Savage wrote the book. It is supposed to be well worth reading. I have never done so. Nor do I intend to. I know I would not enjoy it. My prejudice is not based on what I believe the book to be about. It is derived more from the expectation of an objectionably straightforward presentation of accurate but unpleasant information that really should be common knowledge.
Yuck!
Conservatism is not perfect either. If extremist liberals could compose more than a few coherent sentences, one might write a book about it. Neither conservatism nor liberalism is the worst of the many social complications that those who identify with one but most definitely not the vilified other should be concerned about though. Extremism is what enhances the worst of both.
Homelessness and all the problems associated with it are social problems. They affect all of society. They are neither liberal nor conservative. Yet, extremists so readily blame politicians for causing such problems or allowing them to continue, as if they do so intentionally. Conservative extremist blame liberal politicians just like liberal extremists blame conservative politicians.
How many of those who blame others for homelessness actually do anything about it? Do any of them help the homeless procure domestic situations? Do any of them help the unemployed procure employment? Do they donate food or clothing to those who are in need of such resources? It seems that most are pleased to continue to complain about what others are not doing.
Fortunately, there are many within our Community who are very supportive in regard to helping the homeless, unemployed and needy. We do not hear much from them because they are not so unconstructively outspoken. They do not so blatantly blame others for problems that they are not willing to help out with.
It is good to be hopeful. It is also good to be realistic.
So many seem to be overly pleased that 2020 is over and done with, and expect 2021 to be so much better. It very well could be. However, there are no guarantees. Fire Season is over, but only until next fire season. After all, it is an annual event. The president that so many here despised will be replaced soon enough, but the nicer replacement is not exactly exemplary either.
The Pandemic, or whatever it is known as, was the major news last year that everyone wants to leave in the past. Unfortunately, the new year means nothing to the virus. Progress has been made, but did not eradicate the virus precisely at the stroke of midnight between 2020 and 2021. No one really knows how much worse the situation will get before it significantly improves.
Furthermore, the associated repercussions continue to evolve. While many are enjoying more outdoor activities and gardening, many more are unable to work to earn revenue to pay for the most basic of necessities. Some have procured other employment, but for less compensation. Those who have managed to continue with their employment may have found business lacking.
The eviction moratorium expires at the end of the month. No one really knows what will happen at that time. Some people who can not afford their rent or mortgage could become homeless. Those who rely on rental income may have been lacking some or all of such income for quite a while and may continue to do so. They may consequently be unable to pay their mortgages too.
The local homelessness rate, which had been decreasing for a while, only recently began increasing, and, sadly, has potential to get significantly worse.
Burned leaves fell from the sky a mile and a half from the CZU Lightning Complex Fire.
Other obligations have prevented me from writing here at a time when there is so much to write about. Even now, I must be brief. I do not yet know when I will be able to resume writing weekly as did I prior to about a month ago.
Coronavirus, or whatever it is known as, necessitated the closure of the Conference Center where I work a few days weekly. The facilities are maintained, but, until recently, unused. Most of us who work there needed to find employment elsewhere. It has been financially difficult for many of us, as well as countless others all over the World.
Then, about a month ago, the entire region was evacuated ahead of the migration of the CZU Lightning Complex Fire. Many in the region lost their homes to the Fire, and essentially became homeless. The Community has been as generous and accommodating as it has always been.
As firefighters arrived from so many distant regions, some were accommodated in the otherwise unused lodges of the Conference Center. It was a practical arrangement. They had use for such lodging. Such lodging just happened to be vacant because of the coronavirus.
As firefighters started to vacate the Conference Center and return home, residents of the region also started to return home after evacuation. Some of those who had no homes to return to procured temporary homes from the otherwise unused cabins of the Conference Center. Again, it is a practical arrangement. They had use for cabins that just happen to be vacant.
Also, volunteers who came to the region to assist those who lost their homes as a result of the Fire now reside in some of the lodges that were formerly occupied by the firefighters.
It is unfortunate that there are not sufficient accommodations at the Conference Center for everyone who lost their homes. So much about the situation is unfortunate. The Community will do what it can. Somehow, it always does.
Again, because of other obligations, I must recycle this old article rather than write something new for this week. It might be a few weeks before I can resume writing.
We never know who will read what we post online. It is not like old fashioned newspapers that could only be read as far away as the printed pages got dispersed. Everyone with access to the internet has access to this.
Nowadays, there is nothing unusual about that. Just
about everything is online. What is unusual is that so many outside
of our distinguished Community are interested in reading about us.
This ‘blog’ (Gads! I hate that word!) is not even a
month old, and contains only a few brief posts that are not
particularly compelling. Yet, posts have been read by quite a few
visitors, including some who are nowhere near here. There is
certainly nothing wrong with that. In fact, it is rather gratifying.
It is just unexpected.
Many of the issues that concern our minor local
Community are common concerns that affect many other Communities all
over the World. Nonetheless, different societies contend with such
issues in their own unique ways. Are our techniques somehow relevant
to other cultures and other societies? How similar are they? How are
they different?
It will be interesting to see where outside of America
our posts get read. So far, they have been read in the United
Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, India, France, Switzerland and
China. If it were possible, it would also be interesting to see where
within American the vast majority of those reading our posts are
located.
Furthermore, all this interest in our distinguished
Community stimulates interest in others who are concerned with some
of the same issues that concern us, but from within the context of
potentially very differnt cultures. Is homelessness really as
tolerable in India as so many of us believe it to be? How do the
homeless of Switzerland survive the dangerously harsh winters? That
is what the World Wide Web is for.
The recycled article below is more than a year old, from a time when groups could gather. It may not seem to be relevant while there are no social events, but it will eventually become relevant again. It will be interesting to see how minimal the turnout for some of our familiar social gatherings will be. It was already very minimal prior to the current situation. So many who had formerly lacked a domestic situation or employment have become too busy with new domestic and professional obligations to attend.
(I am sorry that I am presently unable to write new articles as I had been. I do not know when I will resume. As I mentioned, the article below is recycled from more than a year ago.)
Big crowds are proportionate to the popularity of an event. They are sort of expected at exhibits of famous art, important baseball games, and Aaron Tippin concerts. There was quite a crowd at the Felton Remembers Parade and Covered Bridge Festival.
Smaller events draw much smaller but relatively significant
groups. It is always nice to see children celebrating birthday
parties in Felton Covered Bridge Park. Community Bridges (Mountain
Community Resources or MCR) still does play dates for children there
as well.
Our group is very unique. We get good turnout for our special
events too, if we plan ahead for them, and extend invitations.
Otherwise, for regularly scheduled events, such as lunch at Felton
Presbyterian Church on Tuesday, and lunch at Saint John’s on
Thursday, minimal attendance is an indication that more of us are
doing well, and are unable to attend because we are at work, or busy
with other responsibilities.
It is not as if we are an exclusive group that others want to be
members of. Although just about anyone can join, most do so only out
of necessity, but prefer to move onto better situations.
There were more of us in 2013 than there are now. Those who have
joined our group since then have been less numerous than those who
have found homes and employment. There are now fewer of us than there
have been in a very long time. In that sense, minimal membership is a
good thing.
It is unfortunate that this is not a common trend in most other
places. Some of the same social difficulties that are less prevalent
here than they had been are instead becoming more common elsewhere,
particularly in more substantial towns and big cities, such as San
Jose, Watsonville and Monterey. Are we doing something differently
here?
As I mentioned last week, other obligations presently prevent me from writing new posts, perhaps for several weeks. For now, this old article from May of 2019 will be recycled.
Fake environmentalism is a HUGE topic, so for now, will be limited
to fake environmentalism as justification for the eviction of
homeless encampments.
The yellow triangle in the picture above was the site of the
Hero’s Camp, which was more commonly known as Ross Camp, and located
behind Ross Dress For Less in Gateway Plaza in Santa Cruz. It is gone
now. This satellite image was taken by Google Maps prior to the
development of the Camp. I did not get pictures of the camp while
inhabited, but you have likely seen enough other camps in the news to
imagine what it looked like.
It really was as big as it looks, and really did exhibit all the
problems that you hear about in the news, although not to such an
exaggerated degree. Not everyone there used syringes to inject
illicit narcotics. Not everyone there was an alcoholic. Not everyone
was violent, from somewhere else, or a criminal. This is not about
such issues anyway. It is about how the two hundred or so unhoused
people who lived here affected the environment.
Was there trash? Of course there was. Was it more than what two
hundred people who live in homes generate? No. Houseless people do
not generate as much trash as the housed, simply because they lack
resources to purchase the commodities from which so much trash is
generated. The houseless certainly do not waste as much as the
housed. Their trash just happens to be more visible for outsiders who
do not know any better to see.
Furthermore, what is so typically described and perceived as trash
is actually the belongings of those who live in such camps. Without
closets, cabinets or furniture, our belongings would look about the
same, except much more voluminous. When we take just some of the
belongings that we don’t want or need and put them out in front of
our homes, it is a garage sale, and likely amounts to much more than
individual homeless people own.
The satellite image from Google Maps below shows the neighborhood
where my grandparents lived in Felton, less than seven miles north of
where the picture above was taken. Their old home is right in the
middle of the picture. There were not so many other homes there when
they arrived, just as World War II was ending. They lived a
relatively modest lifestyle, on a small suburban parcel. They were
not concerned about the environment.
Why should they have been? Even now, the people who live in homes
here can generate as much trash as they want to, and no one will
complain about it. They can fill their homes with their belongings,
and put them neatly away in closets, cabinets and drawers. There are
alcoholics in this neighborhood, as well as a few who are addicted to
illicit narcotics. Some are criminals. Some are violent. Few are
native. Again, this is off the main topic.
None of that is visible in this satellite image anyway. What it
shows instead is how the lifestyles of those who live in homes are
more detrimental to the environment than the lifestyles of those who
lack homes. This picture is the same scale as the picture above, so
you can see that only a few homes would fit into an area comparable
to that in which about two hundred unhoused people lived. Only a few
people live in each of these few homes.
What that means is that two hundred people like those who lived at
the Hero’s Camp live dispersed over a much larger area, on land from
which trees and vegetation needed to be removed. They all live in
homes that are made of wood derived from trees that grew in forests.
These homes are furnished with synthetic plaster, carpet, paint,
glass, vinyl, metals and all sorts of materials that needed to be
quarried, processed or manufactured.
It doesn’t end there. These homes consume energy for heating,
lighting and whatever else that gas and electricity are used for.
Cars driven by those who live in homes are also constructed from raw
materials, and then need fuel to function. Water is consumed as if it
were not a very limited resource. Much of it gets mixed with soaps
and detergents before going back into the environment. Chlorine
volatilizes from chlorinated swimming pools.
Then there are the landscapes and gardens, the parts of domestic lifestyles that we actually believe to be beneficial to the environment. They contain exotic (non-native) plants that compete with native species, and interfere with natural ecological processes. Irrigation of the landscapes stimulates growth of redwoods, and accelerates decay of oaks. Soil amendments, fertilizers and some of the pesticides change the chemistry of the soil and ground water.
Just compare these two pictures. As bad as the mess at Hero’s Camp
was, the two hundred people who lived there were less detrimental to
the environment and the local ecosystem than those who live in just a
few of the homes visible in the picture below. Those who claim to be
concerned about the environment should be more concerned about the
ecologically detrimental lifestyles of those who live in homes than
those who lack homes.
(Incidentally, the title was changed slightly from the original post [in another blog] to conform to the meme of ‘Hypocrisy’.)
Felton League 