Multnomah County offered free tiny homes if residents housed the homeless. Here’s what happened
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 чер 2023
- Back in 2017, Multnomah County offered to pay for tiny homes in residents' backyards in order to house homeless families. They built four and moved families in. But the program has since gone dark - so what happened?
Read more: www.kgw.com/article/news/inve...
Watch more The Story videos: bit.ly/watchTheStory
Follow The Story on Twitter: / thestorykgw
Follow The Story on Instagram: / thestorykgw
The real travesty is the price that these builders charged to build these tiny houses in the first place, this smells of kickbacks and fraud to me.
Seriously for 80k u can buy a couple of single wides for people which are bigger than these
There may be. But on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis, there should not be an industry of poverty.
@@cherylm2C6671 I agree but what we are seeing now is the beginning of the next great depression brought on from greed at all levels and accelerated by the introduction of A.I and robotics if you think this is bad I'm afraid that we are going to look back in a few years at these times and remember these as the good times as crazy as that sounds.
These are prevailing wage jobs. That accounts for most of that budget. That was actually the least corrupt part of the whole thing.
Those non profits operate with little expectations and the exec salaries are what absorb most of the money.
People think these tiny homes will be cheap. Turns out they are not that cheap. You can get a cheap travel trailer for around 15K. You can buy a decent sized storage shed for a couple thous and convert it for maybe another couple thous.
Lack of accountability? Within the Government?? No way! Color me shocked.
No, they know what they are doing. Government sanctioned money laundering.
Lack of accountability among humans? Color me shocked!
It’s not really a government program. Only a grant provided by government. After the $ is distributed , gov waded it’s hands.
It’s all a grift.
It's best to always assume that the gov't, and the people in it, don't give a damn about you and never will.
The government is you, remember? When you whine about "government", make sure you are looking in the mirror.
First off, there is no reason for those tiny houses to cost over $100k. Secondly, whomever was in charge of implementing this program needs to be investigated.
You could probably get that built for half of that and 10 times less as a DIY project. But since if it's a public contract, it HAS to be more expensive.
Well, you have to pay the administrator their salary, and then the salary of their secretary, and then the lawyer's salary as well as any number of pencil pushers working for the non-profit. And only after all of that, can you pay the salaries of the contractors who then spend the money to build the equivalent of a tiny shed. They probably only spent 10% of that $100k on the actual materials and furnishings. That's how government functions, and that's why government welfare programs almost always fail.
@@OmegaZyion I've worked in public sector for 20 years and I can confirm the amount of dipping and incompetency is insane.
I looked into the tiny houses once. They cost about that much. Was stunned.
@@OmegaZyion theres no way a bunch of people were focused full time on that alone.. its more like a side hustle..
1000 families applied, FOUR were chosen. Disgusting.
I spent 2 yrs homeless sleeping in tents constantly harrassed by police and society. Total strangers with no idea what happened to me but yet judging me as a useless bum. Farm kid to truck driver and many losses and abuse from wife. Lost everything and ended up in the hospital then homeless with nothing. Turnef to petty crime to survive. Thankfully avoided the drugs and got back on track. Be kind to others in bad times. Never know what they dealt with to put them there. Dont have to have them live near you but dont be rude or mean to others you know nothing about. Tom petty, you dont know how it feels to be me. Great song for all.
And they took the best 4 and it still failed. It starts with fixing their mental health before you give them a home. Waste of money as usual.
@@shawnkelly695 - Damn your story sounds like mine. Glad you're doing better. Take care brother
@@justynthyme Who is "Newsom"?
@@tixximmi1 Blaming the victims as usual. At no point were the houseless said to be the problem, asshole. It went downhill when nameless people with power started destabilizing the operations. The rich sank it, not the poor. POS.
Are we going to talk about how $133,000 for building a shack is literally insane?
Yes personally I can build it for 30,000 !! Government is just a scam organization
It could have been done for way cheaper. Insane each unit for affordable housing is running over a quarter million per unit. Totally mismanagement and a mis use of taxpayer money. There has got to be a cheaper way to build affordable housing it has become a money pit in someone’s pockets. Someone told me it is the non profits that are mis managing money and their programs. He said no one takes accountability we need oversight and more accountability from these leaders and non profits. Some one has to force them to do the right thing by fining them for mismanagement and corruption. You must send someone to knock on their doors and make them assume responsibility and make them accountable you can’t wait for them to step up and do the right thing because they wont😢
A fully furnished shavk with all new appliances. They had to run plumbing, electrical,etc.Materials for the building shell are def not the majority of the cost.
Many of the shelterless are building tiny homes for zero cost. maybe hire them?
We just built one (not in Multnomah Co.) for about $40k out of pocket. 800 square feet
I live in Portland. The homeless industrial complex is a black hole for millions of dollars a year. There is zero accountability, no plan, and incessant pressure to waste taxpayer's money for no results. Complete boondoggle if you don't count the hundreds of leaders in these "non-profits" earning six figure incomes. They do not want to fix the problem, that would cut into their bottom line. The problem is worse than ever.
What's your solution? It's easy to complain.
@@yeroca I think he's saying THIS isn't the right solution, and to hire real experts on solving the homeless problem.
@@yeroca Eradicate the homeless overnight by jail or treatment. There is no rock bottom anymore. Contingent case managed housing or jail. This problem was allowed to fester for far too long and the correction will be MUCH more painful than just not allowing it to begin. 60% of homeless in Portland aren't even from here. We are the dumping ground for every other states problem children. Do you have no stomach for change? Will you lay down and submit while Portland is torn apart? What's your solution? Easy to criticize. Do you not have eyes that see? What Portland is doing is making the problem WORSE.
Agreed.
@@yeroca criminalize drug abuse
It's amazing what government employees can do with other people's money. Always helpful to follow the money trail. The poverty industry has no incentive to fix poverty and homelessness.
Point taken, but private companies wouldn't do this themselves because there's no incentive. Government is usually the "only" agency that will tackle large societal problems. Yes, there is waste. There's waste in private business, too. Don't be fooled. You can't imagine how much even large corporations have to budget for waste, fraud and mis-management.
@@jeffg1524Words well spoken. I agree completely.
@@barbaralouise_ Thank you, Barb. 💗
One of my brothers took in a homeless woman and her teenage daughter. He traveled a lot and they had the bottom tier of the house to themselves. They stole from him numerous times and he caught them upstairs doing drugs with the daughter's boyfriend several times. He tried to evict them, but the pandemic was under way and the law said no. He said at least with everything shut down and working from home, he could be there to protect his stuff, but when they started reopening, he had to hire a lawyer to have them removed. And change the locks. The boyfriend was caught on camera breaking into the house. Not all homeless people are like this, but buyer beware, yes?
I am so sorry for that happened to your brother...bad people make us other homeless people look bad... please don't believe all homeless people are like that. I have been homeless for 3 years living in my car and I did stay with a woman who bless me but her son always came by selling drugs in her Yard then some drug dealers came looking for him and my life was put in danger. I kept telling them I don't smoke I don't do drugs I don't drink..I was shot in the leg, yet the weird part is the drug dealer apologize an paid for my hospital bill threw a 3rd party....I learned never to live with people again
What they don't talk about enough is that a good sized percentage of the homeless population suffers from mental illness and drug addiction, which might as well be called mental illness. I would be very wary about sharing my property.
Not all, but most. It's a massive gamble and the odds are not in your favor.
Your brother is a Idiot!
Addiction is very prevalent in our homeless population. Not all people, but honestly, if I were facing long-term homelessness, I'd self medicate too. This is why housing alone will never solve the problem. And we can't fix it unless we understand that many of the causations which result in homeless cause severe trauma, then chronic homelessness is another layer of trauma but cPTSD. It takes a lot of services to help these people move on. Therapy takes time, I know, I have been in therapy for 2.5 years for childhood cPTSD, and I know I have years to go. This is why solving this problem is so difficult. Universal Healthcare would go a long way, especially if it had mental health and substance abuse programs.
Why don’t the gov officials start by putting them in their own backyard
they didnt have room by the pool and private 9 hole golf course
no one forced them to do it it was all voulntary
Yes, lead by example, great idea!!
@@perry92964and yet they still do
Ohhhhh, what an excellent 👌 idea! This should be mandatory.
Make sure I got this straight. The owners of the land allowed the city to build these structures on their property with the understanding that they would get possession after 5 years. In the meantime, they collected no rent, ceded use of their property for five years, and had to deal with the issues of having strangers living in their backyards. NOW, they have to pay for the structures? This is why it's better never to do business of any kind with the government. They make the rules and the rules always favor the government, not the governed.
Yep, ridiculous. The proper response to them saying, "well you can buy it at fair market value" would be, "Well, not interested, you can take it off my property thank you. You have 30 days."
Never do business with the government unless you are a military contractor where price gouging runs rampant and is never challenged, and the budget keeps being increased even though everyone knows price gouging runs rampant and is never challenged
plus the main home owners paid utilities for them! and higher property taxes and higher insurance!
@@SgtJoeSmith I’ll bet the utilities were free. You do have a point about higher property taxes and insurance. Those homeowners were dumb to put themselves in that position. Well, it was Portland, after all.
@@elstongunn4277 hey i dont know but someone had to be paying water, sewer electric and maybe gas. i bet the people living there werent. those tiny houses were a property improvement. so more taxes. and more insurance for another structure and living quarters. unless city said we wont raise taxes. but city dont control insurance. unless program paid the insurance on them????? id be requiring person in my back yard to clean house and do yard work for rent or say no deal. or charge city half the mortgage. the people that signed up. did they think they could easily rent them out after 5 years? if they werent destryed by drug addicts by then? oh heres a nice air bnb in a shack in someones back yard! lets stay there!
I can't even imagine a scenario under which I would want homeless strangers moving into my backyard. Not even for a tiny home after 5 years, which the contract itself offering the home obviously was not enforceable even though it was the Government that dropped the ball and not the homeowner . Plus the type of people that might get shuffled in and out of your property is too unpredictable for me to want to take a chance. Imagine if you got an unstable violent person you couldn't get rid of. Would the government sue you and force you to house that person just because you signed up for that program?
the contract was not enforceable because the government sold the houses to a nonprofit and the rules change.I'll bet those nonprofits do not pay any or a small amount of taxes on this tiny house and property.
They did this in my city, put several tiny homes on a city owned lot in one of the worst neighborhoods. That was almost 10 years ago, and they were trashed within a year, now they just sit there empty and unkempt as far as I can see. The non-profit that got the money to build them got their money, didn't really help anyone, and skated with the payday. Lather, rinse, repeat.
And what if the homeowners, who were promised a free house, refuse to now buy it? Are they going to dismantle it, remove it, and put those backyards back the way they were?
Exactly. Why was this woman charged for the house when they dropped the ball?
@@les0101s As Reagan said; The scariest words in the english language are "we are from the government and we are here to help".
@@richknudsen5781 As the story made perfectly clear, the house was given to a non-profit non-government agency which sold her the house.
Then the homeowner gets stuck with the moving charges I bet.
Never accept anyone's word from the govenment for what will happen, get it in writing with all the contingencies covered and have a lawyer review it. The government loves to say, well that was someone else, now I'm in charge and we're not doing that.
Sounds like a scam when scammers get their money they quit.
That is generally how it works. There is a vast industry that "farms" homeless people for money.
Most government programs are actually to give money to developers or bureaucrats.
And the woman running the thing with big plans to build 300 more!! then when they failed and asked why "Uhhhhhh, sorry I gotta go".
Nah, it's politics.
Spending a couple of 100K to teach people how to solve their issues doesn't show direct results and isn't marketable.
Spending that money on building houses that won't solve anything on their own, is very marketable. (that's why we hear about it here on youtube)
Wait, $130,000+ for a single room house??? My 4 bedroom home only cost me $109,000 12 years ago! No way those tiny homes cost that much! Looks like a scam from the very start!
So you think the cost of things stays the same over 12 years?
Time to start holding these non profits accountable.
Homeless, mentally ill, drug addicted, unwilling to work, people living in your backyard. What could go WRONG???
My thoughts exactly.
Imagine that AND you can't own a scary rifle to defend yourself with.
@@transtubular They can try. I'm old.
Everything. It's Portland
Good thing you people are not uneducated. LOL! Don't worry, Trump will still love you from his prison cell.
Going from "the tiny homes will be free in five years" to "the owner of the yard will have the option to pay hundreds of thousands of dollar in five years" isn't going to encourage adoption if this program is tried again.
I'd like to know if legal documents were signed before the tiny home was placed in anyone's backyard. If not, both parties were unbelievely naive to enter into a "handshake agreement." There should have been documentation outlining expectations and requirements from both the homeowner and Multnomah County's side.
Trump loves the uneducated.
You don't get it. This isn't going to be " tried again ". Government bureaucrats are busily creating new and exciting ways to piss away taxpayer dollars while they get fat paychecks and enrich contractors.
The VA did the same thing, didn't help homeless veterans, stole all the money, and then shut down the program. When are people going to learn?
The homeowners definitely provided "consideration". If there wasn't a legal document saying the county could change the deal, I'd guess the initial marketing of "free" could be considered a contract.
$135000 to build a 300 sq foot house? It's no wonder housing is unaffordable...
It's the age of no accountability. It's infectious.
What happened was all the funds were burned up by all the committees, chairman, analysts, etc. that were hired on to "head this project". After everyone got paid and milked the teet dry they handed it off to someone else and moved onto other ventures.
They have learned long ago they will never be called out, much less tarred and feathered or prosecuted. They can just take the money and run, and if anyone starts rocking the boat they will deal with them quietly because no one in the media is going to allow word to get out.
Sadly, I think you are right. This may be one reason solutions for people who would take full advantage of a hand up, won't get it.
Yup. Failing upwards is typical fare for community organizers and such.
Moved on to another money scam.
I knew they would pull something. Making the homeowner pay current market value after they already gave up their backyards for free and dealt with everything for 5 years?! Sheesh!
Suckers are born every minute, and the Government and 'charity' groups have dealing with suckers down to a science.
Let’s be honest. If they don’t know their local government will screw them by now then they will never get it.
Just the government money laundering again. People need to start waking up.
They knew what the problems where when they started
It’s a *GRIFT!*
I think those homeowners need to get an attorney. They agreed to have the home on their property and to allow people to live in it IN EXCHANGE for owning the house after five years. It is not the homeowner's fault that the program fell apart. They need an attorney.
Martha now has a tiny house in her backyard that she can rent out. Far better than renting out just a room in her house. (Which would actually benefit both her and her new tenant.) Plus, she can charge more per month compared to renting out just a room. Take a good portion of that rent, and donate it to a Homeless charity.... Preferably one that *actually* knows what it's doing.
2:20 "Initially, Martha says, things went well. But then, relationships soured: there were 'challenging circumstances' causing stress among neighbors." Translation: The antisocial issues that lead to homelessness persisted in spite of the efforts of the do-gooders and the back-yard tenants made themselves unwelcome. THEN the County welshed on the deal and screwed-over the homeowners.
Yep, read between those lines...the drinking, drugging, prostitution continued in a residential neighborhood. NEVER agree to take these folks in. Many are professionally needy and work the system they scream has failed them, though they never work either...
@@Angel-nu7fm And what if they refuse to leave after 5 yrs??? Tell me again the homeowners (that let these be built on their property) benefit in all this?
The vetting system is just fucked, I mean I live in downtown portland and there are so many homeless people that just need a chance to get some footing, but seriously the majority of them here are beyond help. I work at a convenience store and I'd say from the last few years experience legit like 2/3 of these people are beyond help and just need to be locked up or committed to facilities.
Spot on. The news story didn't address that reality. And reality, it is.
@@KingofCrusher 2/3? I live in the homeless capital of canada (everyone sends us the homeless because we have good weather) and I worked at the bus depot for 14 years, and I would say 9/10 of homeless people are beyond any sort of real help (like getting a job and a house kind of help) and that last 1/10 person WANTS to be homeless. Spike is a good guy he just likes chillin on the street. Every other one was crazy or has a drug problem they don't want fixed.
Homeowners were told it would be free, then they were told they had to buy it?? What? Did the program not waste ENOUGH money that they had to squeeze some out of the volunteers?
Not to mention 130k builds you a 3k sq/ft home, not under 300 sq/ft. So much waste in government caring for homeless that it's ridiculous.
It seems to me that part of the problem actually is that the city leaders are active in wanting us to be depressed and discouraged. They want us to feel angry and like things are unfair. I think there's evil intent. Certainly the lack of snow plowing which left people to pay out the wazoo for tows and their cars lying around vulnerable to break ins because some city official dude in an office was still staring confusedly at his phone weather app when people like me had shoveled my walk 4 hours earlier...It's just bs. These people act like they couldn't find the darn door in the morning, but yet they're busy at work screwing up every day, well dressed and paid by us.
@@nobodyspecial4702 No! It doesn't!! My house is 800 sq/ft. and $370K at CURRENT market value in Portland, Oregon according to Zillow and other sources! Where did you get YOUR facts?
@@bobwellman9717 Where do you get YOUR facts? The city got the land for free and they don't have to worry about paying for permits or any kind of tax. Building the home is the cheap part, it's everything else that's expensive.
@@bobwellman9717 So, you're saying your stuck in Portland because Zillow overvalues your house and nobody with any intelligence will buy it.
Now, here's what you clearly can't understand, so I will use small words. What a house is worth and what it costs to build are completely different. If you think it's cost 370k to build a 800 sq/ft house, then you are a fool. It costs about 30k tops.
If I was homeless, that would be heaven. I’d be so grateful. If you have a place to shower that is huge. A lot can change for the better in five years if you’re out from under that stigma of being on the street. Just smelling better is a huge boost to one’s own sense of self worth and no one wants to hire or sit in class next to someone that smells like pee.
The defining characteristic of a homeless person is surprisingly not that they don't have a home. It's that they lack the fortitude for one reason or another to function in society. I would put the number of homeless that you CAN actually help in this way at maybe a single digit percentage even if the program worked flawlessly. This report quickly glossed over and moved on from the "why" that the people moved out. I know why they did. They moved in and acted like homeless people.
Our nation has failed the homeless population. Tiny home communities, where there are exclusively homeless people, tend to work well. This is because there are staff on hand; the homeless generally don't get enough emotional support from friends and family. Living on the streets puts people into survival mode which makes it difficult to get off drugs/alcohol. Eden for the Homeless, in Missouri, is working very well; they have tiny homes for the chronically disabled and they also offer overnight pod rentals ($15 or voucher) complete with heat, locking doors, shower facilities..... This was begun by 2 caring individuals/church.
wonder who paid for the water/sewer/elec hookup
@@growlith6969 point taken but helping single digits is better than nothing. Also, I can understand in our current economic environment, why so many are unable to afford rent. It’s stupid expensive and anyone that doesn’t realize that would have to be living under a rock. It takes fortitude to rob a bank. Getting a job that pays enough to pay rent or just having money is based on a lot of variables. If you don’t have a job, any amount is too much. Drugs always cost less than rent and they may not put a roof over your head but you won’t care.
I am guessing that the biggest difference between you and the homeless is mental stability.
Nobody stopped to look around and think "wait a minute, I don't think a garden shed costs $100k to build??"
The homeless industry is costing taxpayers in the US hundreds of billions of dollars.
So is the multitrillion dollar illegal drug industry! It is well protected in high places.
@@royr1016 Well that's the idea - You will own nothing and be happy
I can see how this would create problems. But to try and make these people pay for those homes at fair market value is completely ridiculous.
Moral of this story is get it in writing.
Just reeks of money grabbing, doesn't it?
Exactly, the homeowners should demand to have the homes removed and original yard restored
@@jamespaul2587 Demand? 😂
Life in a blue state 😒
"I'm from the government and I'm here to help." The official introduction to failure.
Thanks for posting this story for everyone witnessing the homeless camps becoming pervasive and who are seriously interested in finding a solution.
Like almost every government program, this homeless program made everyone FEEL good in the beginning, but it takes more than feelings to REALLY help the homeless. You have to address root causes (mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse, and a rotating-door justice system).
Yep..I’m order to fix the problem it takes not feel god things like tough LOVE.
Not only root causes. The homeless have to want to change their life and put forth personal initiative. And without those, nothing will ever change.
@@melissaa152 Exactly! I have a person in my circle that is homeless. I supported that person 10 years, with the only requirement is that they seek help getting off drugs. Never made a true effort. After 10 year of letting that person stay in my house for free and paying for all their food, etc., I kicked them to the curb. That person has been homeless ever since. They never wanted to quit drugs - even to this day. I have no regrets on my actions.
@Naes Galaxy such a childish and naive comment from someone that doesn't understand what they are referring to. That's Marxism for you
And addressing those root causes also takes more than fuzzy feelz. People seem to think mental illness is just about talking to a therapist and they don't understand how much of it can really only be treated with institutional living.
Let the officials allow homeless people live in their yards. They are mostly the ones who caused this poverty and drug use.
Actually it was when Jimmy Carter's administration agreed that the majority involuntary committals were deemed unconstitutional. This is the result of a 50 year ruling.
Repeat after me: Homeless people are not homeless because of what anyone else does. They’re homeless because they’re not able to function in normal society.
I live in Los Angeles and have done volunteer work dealing with the homeless. In a large majority of the cases the reason people are homeless isn't a lack of housing but rather mental illness or hard core drug addiction which often leads to mental illness. So unless those issues are resolved tiny homes just enable a self destructive lifestyle that adds to community blight, property crimes and vandalism. As far as the affordability of housing goes if someone can't afford to live someplace they can find affordable housing elsewhere. My mother commuted to work 60 miles each way to L.A. because we couldn't afford to live there. You know why I don't live in Beverly Hills? Because I can't afford to. Does that give me a right to pitch a tent in a park there, I don't think so.
“Non-profit” must refer to the effect the program has on the community.
They only offered this in order to embezzle the money off to the contractors. 130k for a tiny home is absurd.
I would love to see some lawsuits to hold these "nonprofits" and the inept Portland government accountable!
Or some vigilantes!
“Non profits” are always about profits..oh and exempt from certain taxes..
What I can't understand is why this is so rampant in the first place, like a horrible carnival going around milking whole cities, but more targeted somehow.
It's wild that there's seemingly no recourse for this. No lawsuits or anything?
As a homeowner, why would you hire a lawyer and spend the money on a lawsuit with an uncertain outcome, that will drag on as a civil matter for years. If those tiny houses stay empty for too long, the homeowner can claim adverse possession.
Much of the problem lies with the attitude of the homeless themselves - no matter what is done for them or where they are placed, unless they want to make the best of the opportunity and change their life's circumstances, these programs are going to fail. I should know - I've been homeless myself.
There is already a way to solve homelessness. It's called going to work.
WHAAAA?!! Now that's just CRAZY TALK! !!!
@@jasonrodgers9063 I know, right? 😵💫
I'm a retired human services worker and I can tell you why this failed. All of the programs start with a bucket of money to get the project up and running. The issue is this. None of the grants ever want to pay for salaries, they only cover the "hardware" part of the program. Once the program is started the agency then has to start looking for money to pay for the employee part of the program. That pot of money has to constantly be fundraised because you typically never get enough to pay for more than a year worth of salaries, and because they get so little money for salaries, the only employees they can afford to hire are usually kids right out of college. Three problems there. One, no one can live on those small wages, so the employees only stay long enough to put something on their resume, then move on to better paying jobs with benefits. Typically, these programs never offer benefits. Secondly, because the original grant only pays for housing and furniture, there is never really a program developed to actually manage the clients involved. So you get a constantly changing workforce with no experience and no real program. The folks in these programs typically need a host of services and a significant amount of time to keep them stable enough to maintain housing. Because social service programs have to fundraised constantly these services are often, as is the case with the Portland program, passed around from agency to agency. So you get no continuity of service to the participants, who then fail to stay housed or simply give up and quit.
So what you need is more money. That's always the liberal answer isn't it?
@@robertwoodpa6463 No, it really is "if you can't sustain it don't start it". Notice that he said the grants only pay for hardware.
The people who end up pocketing the money know how to keep it for themselves while creating a guise of giving it to the needy.
@@robertwoodpa6463 Tis the way of grants, they typically only cover the capital equipment, in this case the houses. rarely the cost of program upkeep.
An example; the local transit authority landed a relatively huge federal grant for upgrades, with it, they got nice new busses, spiffy new heated bus stations, maintenance facility upgrades, the works. the only problem is that the grant did not cover the day to day expenses of all the new capital equipment. no additional bus drivers or mechanics, they did have to hire more facilities staff to cover all the additional assets, they ended up not hiring enough drivers to cover all the shifts, one side of the busses is now a full sized billboard help wanted ad
"One, no one can live on those small wages," apparently you can in someone else's back yard.
They are paying too much for them. $30,000 should be enough to build a tiny house.
They should be pre-fab in a factory, to make the price as cheap as possible.
@@MB-xe8bb Exactly right. Plus, there's the "economy of scale" for building a lot of the same house. Anything over $30,000 for a decent "tiny house" is a scam. Probably every city in the U.S. has vacant city-owned property which could be used for "tiny house" villages. It could be done... but they would have to actually skip the graft and do the job.
Here's what I think would help the most:
1. Constant sanitation pick up. Pick up all the litter, everyday. Eventually there will be far less litter and trash.
2. Roaming RVs with a 15 minute shower and a new change of clothes.
That's it. Nothing else will work.
In Oregon, the average cost to build a brand-new home average at about $135 per square foot.
So 300 sq ft means $40,000. Not over $100,000.
So they were planning on spending $250 million (or so) and they built less than $1 million worth of tiny homes on property they didn't have to but. And they're now insisting the property owners buy the tiny homes at market value (presumably this would be similar to the cost of a small manufactured home in a park where the homeowner doesn't own the land the house sits on).
WHERE'S THE OTHER $240,000,000?!
The politician's pockets, where else? It IS Portland after all...
It was never a serious project at any level. A small set of people made a bunch of money off this idea and then moved on to the next idea. Its not about helping the homeless. Its about these people helping themselves to cash.
Some 7-figure salaried sh!tweasel gave him/her-self a big fat bonus. It's real hard stressful work worrying about the poor and doing JACK 💩!
The 250 million is what the city spends on homeless people. (large part of that is probably police)
This project was only 500K. And most of that went to building the houses. No money was put aside to actually help and learn these people how to care for their home, how to budget money etc.
So, not really surprising it didn't work.
@@Robbedem We all know what would help them. Tough love. Placing them under arrest and taking them to jail, then to court for violation of vagrancy laws. A 60 day lock-up and 8 hours a day of picking up trash along the Interstate would hopefull provide the incentive for alcoholics and drug addicts to clean that 💩 up and become a productive member of society. Instead we enable their criminal behavior by buying them $300 a night hotel rooms. The crazies need to be held in mental facilities to be treated and to protect the forgotten taxpayer without whom none of these political 💩weasels would have a paycheck.
Most of the "street" homeless have mental problems and what's needed is to have asylums again. As for tiny houses, allowing "mother-in-law units" is what we've done here in California and it's been quietly opening up housing for people who can't afford to rent a whole house or even a "luxury" apartment. But most of the obviously homeless, you don't want them anywhere near your house.
We will need to change the laws to allow crazy people to be locked up. Right now you can basically only hold them for 72 hours. Of course the ACLU will fight this tooth and nail.
it's the drugs
You can not put people in jail (asylum) without them performing a crime first. "Mental problems" is a chicken and egg problem of which came first? If I put you , or anyone on the street, we would have mental problems in a few days of little sleep , no shower/bathroom, no healthy food.
@@eldebtor6973 if only it were that simple! I think most average Americans are one major medical problem away from homelessness. Homelessness has always come from a myriad of reasons.
@@markae0 bullshit!
Why didn't the city just place those homes on their OWN properties to house the homeless?
This is the issue that happened with a homeless tent city near the bus area, in our area, no follow through, no support mechanisms. The heart of a good program, is the heart of the people that initiated it. Visions are hard to carry through without the people sharing a vision and being all on board as it moves forward. A home is great, but service support must continue for the people on both sides.
Humans need a purpose, not just a handout.
Well put. I wish the people trying to solve homelessness understood that basic concept.
What does having a “purpose” mean? I’m 61, and I have no purpose, that I’m aware of…. That is such an odd, and empty statement.
Much like “follow your passion” is an empty, verb free, hollow statement.
Maybe it’s just me! 😂🤷🏽♀️
It's not really a handout when there's a five year cap. More like a little breathing room to people struggling to make ends meet. But with so little oversight and accountability it just seems like an industry made by opportunistic bureaucrats. Sickening.
@@robertwoodpa6463 the fascists were not wrong when they said "work makes you free", are we that scared of ourselves that we can't trust ourselves from not turning it into concentration camps? C'mon guys! oratories that housed street urchin would teach the children music and carpentry and what would have been people that would grow up into criminals became good lawful and productive people.
humans need a home, not entitled boomers opinions
Just call this program what it is. Job security for government and charitable organization employees with minimal benefits for the people who need help.
The is a classic grift ! Live in a blue city & state & you get what you get .
When you take responsibility for other people because they won't take reasonability for themselves, guess what...that is your problem now!!!
If I were one of the *4* people who signed up for this bait and switch deal, I wouldn't pay a dime for that house that was built on my property. Possession is 9/10s of the law. See you in court.
There are basically three types of homeless. 1. The unlucky. This program would help them. 2. The mentally ill. Giving them a home does not fix anything. They will often trash their homes or simply run off to the streets. They need care and oversight. 3. The lazy. These are the people who just want to party. The tiny home will be a base of operation for using drugs and the problems will spill out to the neighborhood. Group 3 could starve, for all I care. Group 2 are the most expensive and probably the largest most tragic group. Group 1 just needs a temporary helping hand and they will do the rest.
Interesting take on it.
Unlucky is a very very narrow group most 'normal' people wouldn't consider homeless in the truest sense. I know personally what it is like to be in a bad spot and not really have any plans for what to do when put out of Section 8 housing and wind up living in a vehicle or on the couches of people for some time. But ultimately the question was, what was I willing to do about it? Some people decide they would rather keep living like that than get a job and find a place they could actually afford to live. Some WANT to be in the big city with the big perks and are not willing to go somewhere they can actually be successful. Fortunately, I made the right choice in the end and those are just memories, as is the idea that I ever wanted to live smack dead in the middle of a city.
There's a 4th category you missed. People living on minimum wage paying over 50% of their income for rent. They are usually one unexpected doctor bill or car repair away from being out on the street. They are more economically disadvantaged/ suppressed than unlucky.
@@andrewn6384 I agree. I failed to take that into account, though they could potentially be categorized in "unlucky". But, there are too many people working low paying jobs in areas with excessively high housing costs. Even without bad luck, they can't afford a place to live.
@@andrewn6384 Statistically, this is a very, very small group
Why would homeowners want chronically dysfunctional addicted people living in their backyards? All it would do is make their lives (and those of their neighbours) miserable and drastically decrease the value of their properties.
The drug of virtue signaling is very powerful....
Not every homeless person is drug addicted and not everyone is afraid like you are?
I'm not willing to rely on the government to choose who gets to stay. If I was going to give up my property I'm choosing the person myself.
@@melanienolley only 99%. literally, look it up. you have to fuck up bad to burn every bridge that many times and end up on the street.
Christians could tell you.
Can’t gauge success/failure ON FOUR. Why did she HAVE to buy the house if the gov. dropped the ball on getting it Re filled? Chg terms aren’t allowed after contract is made. I’d sue to own house outright.
Problem is….after 5 years the city and county WON’T evict them if they prove to be problematic. Homes are very nice.
So they spent $500k to build 4 houses at roughly $35k each on property the city does not own. Where did the rest of the money go? Seems to me if the city built a house on private property the real homeowner should be able to tell the city to remove the house or start paying rent for keeping it on private property.
The city is in on the scam ! Imagine the kickbacks that are being thrown around .
There has to be a contract somewhere with a signature on it. Otherwise, the property owners can counter sue.
On 2:00 it is said they were 80K up to 130K.
its an old one, but it applies,.....
Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. Congress said someone may steal from it at night, so they created a night watchman position (GS-4) and hired a person for the job.
Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?" So they created a planning position and hired two people: one person to write the instructions (GS-12) and one person to do time studies (GS-11).
Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?" So they created a Q.C. position and hired two people, one GS-9 to do the studies and one GS-11 to write the reports.
Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So they created the following positions, a timekeeper (GS-09) and a payroll officer (GS-11) and hired two people.
Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?"
So they created an administrative position and hired three people: an Admin. Officer (GM-13), an Assistant Admin. Officer (GS-13) and a Legal Secretary (GS-08).
Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $18,000 over budget, we must cutback overall cost," so they laid off the night watchman.
@@brianjones7660 This doesn't just apply to the government though.
$133k for a tiny house?
Well, with costs, permits and the grift involved to line many pockets I guess that's a fair price.
For Chicago!
Why not just get a shed from Lowes for $99?
@@karlabritfeld7104 That wouldn't supply enough Grift money to pay of the people running the Scam, Er, I mean the Program.
@@karlabritfeld7104 Let’s see, a shed in Chicago overnight at 25 degrees sounds really cozy. How about 100 degrees during the summer? People might also want a bathroom, kitchen, and bedroom, along with windows and walls. But I guess that would be too much to spend on homeless people, right?
@@durinok That is too low but How Much do Manufactured Homes Cost? ; Septic (Incl. Design & Approval), $15,000.00 ; Appliances, $6,500.00 Much less than 80K
$461 a square foot! Holy mother of Jesus!
Almost makes you want to start a non-profit so you can also have a 6-7 figure annual salary and have no accountability, right?
Did nobody in the city government ever ask the question "does the city have 1 or 2 acres that could accommodate 5-10 tiny homes?" would have been the best thing to do vacant city lot(s) that defaulted turned into homeless housing. smh
If you want something screwed up, give it to government to "manage".
Activists don’t help much either, they just raise awareness.
Business people just want to be paid.
Somewhere there is a middle ground. They can be found, usually a small group that’s been around for awhile with proven methods and wise leadership that has true compassion. They aren’t looking for glory and don’t get in the news much since they’re to busy working.
Why did this woman have to "buy it" when she was told it would be Free.?
Because she is a LIBERALIDIOT!
Because the government didn’t keep its promise. No surprise.
why was it still vacant? At least it wasn't trashed by tenents.
What kills me is I'm a man with disabilities and been homeless for over a year. This state claims to have resources but no one no where will help me. No hotel vouchers no help with rent nothing. There's more open rooms in older motels than can count but they refuse to put me into one. Yes I'm on the housing list at #789 from #990 as of last year.
I wonder how embarrassing it feels to be a politician. I have a hard time imagining living a life with no success whatsoever.
$88,000 - $133,000 for a "shed" ?!?! How is no one questioning the price that these construction companies are charging to build a shed?....and that the government is paying those prices....for a shed !!!! These news reporters are supposed to be asking "the tough questions" ...how can they not see the issue with those prices ?
Probably a decent amount of money in plumbing and electrical.
That's not a 'shed' as you put it. It's a full micro-apartment. Insulation, wiring, plumbing, appliances, furniture. Virtually none of that is needed for a 'shed.'
Money laundering. I'm sure the grease was laid on thick.
Its called the government homeless industrial complex for a reason. Its classic progressivism. You may know progressivism by its other name - crony capitalism. surprise!
@@geraldbennett7035 Programs run by Democrats to milk their constituents. Shocker.
The homeowners should have had legal documents written on what happens and who owns the tiny house after 5 years.
This might explain why only 4 homes were chosen out of thousands. Everyone else was smart enough to ask for some kind of guarantee in writing.
Yes, when i got government help on my mortgage i had to sign closing documents just like when i bought the house. After 7 years i received the copy of docs stating i fulfilled the term and my house can no longer get a lien over it.
But when i got pandemic assistance there was no such thing. It made me nervous and sure enough... they bait and switched me claiming i qualufied for $40,000 and only gave me half. At least i got half! 😒
once the house program gets sold to a nonprofit the state and city are out of the picture.
The more money thrown at the issue of homelessness only adds power/resources to the politicians that propagate the problem.
What a stupid deal. Homeless people living in your backyard would just result in them trashing your property with garbage, drug using, noise, & being a general nuisance!
Why tf did she have to purchase the house that they put on her land, when she followed through on her end of the agreement and the county dropped the ball?! She should have sued the county instead. This is entirely effed up and unsurprising at the same time.
If YOU want something done right. DON'T involve the government. It's that simple. They will miss manage the whole process of making it better. Screening out the people that will abuse this project is paramount. No drugs! That means drug testing, criminal background checks. On sight management. No waiting for government approval. Get them in and working and then out for the next person...Then, private security that has oversight. That's just the start of it all...
Private companies will do even worse and charge more money.
@@karlabritfeld7104
True. We have to make the best choices we can with the people and information we have. Why I don't trust the word of anyone I don't know. Background checks, internet, everything you can use and make your decision. Giving up isn't a choice.
@@karlabritfeld7104 Exactly. The government contracts all of this stuff out to 3rd party companies that gets churned up in the capitalism machine. We should make sure we don't take a failure to launch as evidence that the solution isn't a good one.
Adding a profit motive to the equation might not be the answer. In fact, private companies have always been welcomed to take this problem on. They can even get help from the government to do that. The government is just doing what the private citizens aren't willing to do.
@tneighbors
Yes. Corruption is rampid in the private sector. Wolves in wait to take advantage of government grants. Keep it small and with people you know. Half the $ up front and the rest at finish with some kind of accountability.
People should not be allowed to live for free off of hard working tax payers when they are very capable of working. There are plenty of jobs available in America so these people should be offered JOBS and not free stuff all of the time. These kinds of ridiculous programs would explain why there is a labor shortage: if everyone is getting everything for free, then these slobs and bums will sit on their sofas all day long watching t.v eating and eating potato chips.
Imagine trusting Government, both local and national? Wow, some people just remain ignorant and learn nothing their entire lives.
I live in Portland. The homeless are just moved around. They go from downtown to neighborhood, to freeway to neighborhood. This idea sounds ridiculous. I would be afraid that they would leave my back yard in the horrific condition that they leave their current sites. There is a lot of land to build tiny homes on and have the homeless pay for them by 'working'. It should be operated as a non-profit...not at taxpayer's expense. I am sure that there is a small percentage that would take advantage of a plan like this; but the problem won't be solved for most homeless until they have an incentive to make a change. They have to want it enough to give up the drugs and some of their freedom.
Move them all next to the city dump and let them live there. They would not be permitted to leave and set up another camp in any other part of the city. Return the rest of the city back to the honest, decent tax paying citizens.
The " homeless" are always repulsed by the idea of working..
Not going to work at all. The homeless people are not homeless because there aren’t enough houses or not enough work or because they aren’t able to work. They’re homeless because they want to be, because they either can’t or won’t be a functional adult, because they choose hard drugs and alcohol, and because they know how to survive on the streets. Building more houses and giving them work and all that makes no difference. None.
This sounds like a disastrous idea considering a lot of homeless people suffer from mental health issues and some are downright dangerous! It makes sense however, when you consider it's coming from Portland. They seem to have no shortage of dumb ideas.
You can vet the homeless, a large bulk of homeless people are just down on their luck. It's not a bad idea, it just needs to be done responsibly.
@@chrisjackson1215 Wrong. If down on their luck was the problem, it could be easily solved. Like most lefties, you don't get it and that's why your solutions never work.
@@chrisjackson1215 Responsibly? Like screwing over the tax payer and the homeowners? So who from those 'responsible' who have zero stake in someone living in someone else's backyard - is going to vet the homeless?
Can you imagine if one of these homeless persons hurt the home owner or their children? If they are willing to risk their and their families safety I say let them, just don’t use tax dollars to do it.
@@fidgetssailing4725 Right, because I was TOTALLY defending the city here. Your reading comprehension needs some work.
Sargent Schultz is running the program: "I know nothing!"
lol
Once they take up residence, you cant get them out and you are now responsible for their insanity.
Never let the government into your life.
In Los Angeles, we have these tiny homes all stacked together for efficiency. We call them “apartment buildings.”
I keep hearing how N.H. is funding "Affordable Housing "...affordable for who ? Not the homeless elderly, disabled, veterans, mentally ill, families with children, or working
poor...who need subsidized housing. N.H. is taking federal tax payer funds, sending the money to cities, towns...who loan the $ to for profit property owners, who get intrest free loans for 60 years, who then develope apartments, & rent them for profit !! Their target group mentioned are teachers, & police officers. ..so the $40,000- $65,000 range...which will have zero effect of housing the homeless, & syphons money from taxpayers, & gives it to for profit business owners !!! THIS IS A TOTAL SCAM !!!!
Literally a $10-15k at most shed, maybe another $10-15K in finishing inside and fixtures.
Even if you inflate those numbers, don't come anywhere near the $80-130K build cost. These builders know it's a government contract, and probably had a tiny "approved" list that could submit.
Buy at fair market price? Just tear the darn thing down, get it off my property.
Tow it away
Where did the rest of the money that was allocated to this program go?
Fair question Will. Please look into it. xfered to another dept/agency and misplaced IMO
Here's a thought. Instead of building giant tracts of houses that no one can afford to live in, why not take that same land, and split it up into tiny homes, and let people live there. Or chop up the abandoned malls and turn them into tiny apartments and let people live there. Why is that complicated?
There is no way in hell that a homeless person is moving onto my property.
The scariest words you will ever hear. I'm from the Government and I'm here to help!!
We had a program to build dog houses by people who in lieu of jail, were in a work release program. It worked fantastically well. Most of the guys were builders and had their own tools! Perfection! ZERO cost and it helped the guys do something useful and the dog houses went to shelter pets in need. Why not use the same plan for people?
Building shelters is never going to be the problem; finding a place for people to live in those shelters, is. With the paltry amount of money I have, I could order prefab tiny house online, or a cute miniature yurt, or a high-quality wall tent that would be perfectly serviceable in the climate I live in, but what good would that do if I have no place to put it?
Look at Community First! started by Mobile Loaves and Fishes in Austin, TX. All of it has been built through donations and no public funding as once you have federal or state funding you get lots of opinions/asinine rules. There are 350 housed previously homeless individuals and plans to house nearly 2000 in the next ten years. It is a really neat village with all the things needed by people living there. It is a very happy place too....check it out!!!
Because they don't want to work or be accountable for anything or anyone. Bleeding ❤ libta6ds don't get it. Plus, the government doesn't care about you or them. Wake up please! Help stop this insanity.
Were the dogs homeless drug addicts, or dealing with mental health issues?
And put the dog 🏠 in kotex's back yard and every demonrats yards that's how you see how fast things either change or they will need some cheese with their whine.😂😂😂
Being HOMELESS is a nightmare whether your fault or not ...
the failure started when it costed $80k - $135k to build a shed.
They wanted to do 300 which would have cost $32M at an average cost of $106500. They built 4, where did the rest of the $250B go? Interesting subject, but I think the money is a story in of itself.
Exactly. It's the old flim flam , grift , ponce scheme. If you question anyone at city hall you're immediately labled anti homeless & right wing Trumper nut job ! Why is it a crime to ask for accountability ?
Looks like Multnomah county is emulating SF, which is now spending $1.1 billion annually on the homeless. It allows for extravagant spending on projects like this - big cost, small results, and then it quietly goes away. And as the homeless crisis worsens the spending will continue to balloon with more and more projects like this.
It makes me sick n angry to hear that these officials wasted that much tax money on the homeless issue. 🤢😡
shocker: lots of municipalities (even my very small town in maine) have already banned living in a tiny home. because god forbid someone lives cheapish without 6 figures of debt. it makes people jealous and then they make it illegal.
so it went from a way to help homeless people to a way to scam homeowners into paying to build tiny homes in their backyard? also why did they cost 130,000?
Anything the government has control of they charge 10× what it's worth for there own pockets
This is the kind of crap you see in these universities here, where a policy-center is 'organized', and then you have a bunch of 5-6 figure loafers... directors, coordinators, administrative assistants... under the umbrella of a 'mission-statement' provide 'guidance'. The only thing that's actually executed is a slew of e-mails and 'workshop' policy-booklets. And, in the meantime tuition skyrockets.
As far as 'market-value' purchase for the tiny-home? Well, if they fell for the sales-pitch, then I guess it was supposed they'd fall for just about anything. If you wrap any package here with a 'We care/We support' bow, folks will gobble it up.
❤
This is one reason the cost of a college education has skyrocketed--plus adding in more and more "required" courses. I was faculty in a community college, so yes, I have seen all kinds of programs implemented to encourage college success in diverse populations, etc. Plenty of administrators and directors who just "enlighten" people about the problems but who don't come up with real solutions.
To their credit, the solutions to these problems are complex and would require tons more money than what is available. For example, providing free transportation to classes and on-campus childcare would do more good than most "feel good" programs. IMO.
Yup . Professional grifters pure & simple .
@@cherfromtn8225 Another solution to the childcare need is teaching students to keep their legs together rather than expecting others to pitch in to fund their fuck.
The leadership is evidently insane. They do not seem to have given a single thought to observed human nature. People need to be treated fairly, but in such a way that they must work daily in order to live independently. The addicted need to be institutionalized. If society uncritically supports people who will not work, as a rule, it will have more and more of them until it cannot do this anymore.
This guy gets it.
Mass institutionalization is not encouraged by the mental health community, whether you're talking about mental health or addiction issues. Most were closed in the 1950's and 60's, a time that saw one expose after another about the inhumane treatment of patients in these facilities. It also had the effect of taking the financial burden off the federal gov. The final end to them was when Reagan repealed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, effectively defunding them. The stated idea was to shift the burden for any such facilities to the states - community focused mental health care. There are far fewer today, so the overall cost in taxes is lower, but now we have them sleeping on the streets instead. Hard to figure out which is worse. Or rather, two horrible options: A past of abuse and inhumanity. A present of indifference and suffering.
Society's problems will never be solved if that can't even be discussed in plain English. Why was this woman living in a truck? If she got a nice new house, why didn't that solve her housing problem? What were the behaviors that caused her to leave? Why did she require oversight? Did the homeowners know what they were getting into?
In other words, this isn't really a housing issue at all. It's about drigs and mental health and crime.
IF Zoning allowed for Tiny Homes/Garage Apts (affordable) all along there'd be no Homeless problems.
Having a structure like that in your yard increases your Property Tax, Utilities, Insurance Premiums, etc
NO WAY that the homeowner should pay the market price since it's taking up their land, I'd be saying REMOVE it or I'll be charging space rental on it for being on my land !!!!
Church profits & land need to be used for these programs
So…….where’s all the money???