Honestly the housing first is a bad idea for the visibly homeless. Might work Ok for the invisible homelessness but the property damage costs can easily be factors lager than even the rent cost.
I think you should seriously reconsider your position.
There is a chronic inebriate apartment building downtown Seattle that makes no moral judgements about "stopping drinking" etc that LOWERS COSTS (with studies to back it up) for the community.
People with problems get a permanent address. Ambulance and police calls drop as they aren't chasing these guys all over town.
Think again.
MAYBE your position is more about being judgemental about their moral state then actually whats good for them and the rest of us.
EDIT -
Just to be clear. If someone is too far gone (and many of these guys are) then we need to start funding involutanry commitment beds.
Might be marginally effective but at what cost. If it costs more a year to house one of the chronically homeless than incarcerate then then I’d go with the cheaper option. The money is better used to help the invisible homeless after that point
