There seems to have been people living on the hillside at Santa Barbara High School, above the outdoor basketball courts by the senior parking lot.
Vegetation has been drastically reduced and a crew is cleaning up.
Uncovered Encampment Found on Santa Barbara High School Campus
Edhat Reader
January 27, 2024, 1:44 pm
14.3k Views
35 Comments
Written by Edhat Reader
Comments
0 Comments deleted by Administrator
Leave a Review or Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Noticed this posting yesterday, and thought the usual lets look it up. So riding up N Quarantina Street up the sketchy hill, thru the roundabout then past the dismantling of (?) sale to see what was left. Looks as if they stopped after finally dismantling that structure. There was a rather impressive “Divot” where it stood, some pretty monumental earth moving was involved prior to assembly! (like levels or other “Precision tools”)
…no judgements, just my observations 🚲
They had to dig out a lot of contaminated dirt…hence, the divot!
it was here->
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4300386,-119.6969502,57m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu
…don’t know how took up that date of that overhead shot, I think it was a Tuesday?
Why not provide mini campsites with a small plot of ground, power and running water. That’s all that many want.
Is that supposed to be a joke?
Only to narcissistic sociopaths who find helping those in need to be funny or at least highly offensive.
Let’s just turn Santa Barbara into a big homeless shelter?
Then the entire homeless population of the country (and those coming over the Biden border) can move here with our incredible beauty and weather. I mean, WHO would not want to live here?
Does every single person who wants to, have a right to live here on our streets and school campuses?
Yeah, because everyone wants to live in a bush or in a shelter. That’s totally the same has having your own home, job and steady source of food. Boo hoo, the homeless might be treated like human beings. WAHHHH not fair!
It is a well known fact that many of the homeless choose to be that way. When they are offered safe places to stay….they refuse. Many do prefer to live in a bush, on their own because they don’t have to follow any rules that may apply with other living situations. Like no drugs or alcohol, for example.
RJJ – really? Can you please provide a link to that “fact?” Is it that they “refuse” shelter or that they are not able to be admitted because they’re drunk/high, which violates the shelter policies? If only as the homeless were really as picky as you make them out to be.
without getting nasty or anything, yes there is a percentage that simply do not want to go into a shelter. They refuse to go into any kind of shelter. I do not know that they are on drugs, they may just be mentally off. BUT – you cannot force them to go into safe clean housing arrangement against their will.. If you talk to any of the police or social workers they will tell you the same. (One quick example is that older lady wandering around Loreta Plaza and upper State Street pulling a hand cart. There are any number of us – me included – that tried to help her out, steer her to a facility – but she refuses to go.
Why get nasty? Yes, mentally ill and addicts maybe be resistant to help, but to say “many homeless” would rather live in bushes and shelters than homes or housing is just not true. Further it’s missing the point of my original sarcastic response to SZQ’s heartless comment.
You called? I’m a social worker that has worked with homeless and I’m here to tell you, only a very small percentage choose to be homeless. The majority are not refusing a “safe place” to live bc you know what? That aren’t safe. Many of them have a weakened immune system and a shelter only compromises their health. Some have pets and they aren’t allowed to enter with their pet. I’m sorry but my doggy is my only source of joy and i would rather sleep outside too, rather than giving her up. I can go on and on giving you valid reasons but you don’t sound like you want to hear or believe it. Did you know that many homeless begin to drink only once they become homeless? They drink bc it gives them the illusion that they aren’t cold. Some die of hypothermia. Btw… that lady from Loreto Plaza is not homeless. She lives near Alamar. She has MH issues and appears homeless, according to the stereotypes.
Thank you for this calm and thoughtful response! …I had stopped reading edhat because of the quality of the conversations.
JudiMagda – Thank you. It’s refreshing to hear from someone who actually knows what they’re talking about here. I’d love to hear more from you on these articles about homelessness.
Would you agree with RJJ above if he stated it this way?:
It’s not that many homeless people prefer to live outdoors instead of in. It’s that many would rather live outdoors than abide by a shelter’s rules, e.g., no dogs, no drugs, etc.
That seems to be what both of you are saying. And I agree. But I do not know what percentage of the homeless population that is? 5%? 50%?
It’s a well known fact that right wingers are ignorant sociopaths.
No, I would not agree. RJJ’s tone seems to imply that Homeless people just don’t want to follow rules. The reality is that what is being offered is not viable, practical, or holistic. I’ll put it to you this way: if you’re starving and I offer you poisonous mushrooms, will you eat them? That’s going to depend on what’s at stake for you at that given moment. You might take it if you prefer not to die of starvation. Or you might refuse it knowing it’s going to kill you, but you won’t die from hunger. Judging someone based on that choice speaks more about us as a society than it does on them. But we aren’twilling to have that conversation.
RJJ also stated “many” prefer.. and that’s not true. As far as the % of homeless who refuse, I said “a very small %” bc it’s very hard to really pinpoint. I’m getting into dark water now, but you’ll never get stats from this County that aren’t skewed in some way. From my own experience, as a public servant and as someone who has volunteer many times doing the Point in Time count, I would say that it of 10, only 1 (or 2 at most) truly preferred to sleep outside than to follow “rules”. The rest had genuine, valid reasons… which were more like obstacles/roadblocks. We truly do not know someone’s circumstances until we’ve personally walked in their shoes. As a society we’re seriously lacking compassion and empathy.
Sacjon- i read your posts/comments and i agree with a lot of what you say. I don’t post more often bc we can’t teach someone compassion. They either have it or they don’t. Very few are actually wanting to be educated about these issues. I also get worked up and triggered… frustrated and angry with so much injustice.
Lastly, i can’t stand edhats new layout. It reminds me of old-school email where the convos wraparound and you feel like you’re reading sideways. Drives be nuts.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply.
OK, ignoring the very few who prefer to sleep outside, will you list an example or two of obstacles/roadblocks that prevent someone from gaining available shelter? The more specific, the better. This is a chance for you to educate someone interested in helping! It seems like these might be problems that can be solved.
the entire US has a massive food shortage and houseless problem. it’s not just santa barbara or just california. banks and land barons control the land and would rather allow it to be vacant rather than help those Americans in need. We aren’t all wealthy….most of us need a hand.
We have a massive food shortage? I had not heard that. Will you clarify what that means? I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that too many calories was our bigger problem.
actually US farmers are so productive that the govt has to buy up excess food to prop up the market in addition to the huge amount exported. I think KN is confusing shortages with people making bad decisions.
I think KNein is referring to food insecurity. That is a much more prevalent problem. In a nutshell, that refers to people being unable to afford/access healthy food and balanced meals. That then results in poor nutrition, including obesity.
I think you’re right. But one should be more careful then and not say we have a “massive food shortage” when one means we eat poorly. Possible solutions to each of those problems is very different.
Well, it’s not just that “we eat poorly,” it’s more that many don’t have access to healthy food, or a steady supply of food.
The solution is to help. To spend money on programs that help those in need. The solutions are simple really, the problem is, half the people in this country absolutely lose their minds when politicians want to use their tax dollars to help others. It’s a uniquely American problem. We don’t see this in other civilized countries.
OK, fair enough. Assume I agree with you that we should “spend money on programs that help those in need.” What do they need? 1) More calories (due to a massive food shortage). Or 2) fewer calories, more fruits and vegetables, less meat, etc.? Are the solutions to those two needs the same?
That’s a great question for the Foodbank of SB. Maybe check in with them?
People have different needs, but the only way to help them, is to spend money. Bottom line.
I’m not trying to back you into a corner, honest. But how can you be so certain that spending money is the solution to two very different problems?
Yeah, should have clarified a little. I meant spending money is a critical component of helping others, no matter what the specific need. It costs money to purchase/gather and distribute resources to the masses. This is the problem though – many, mostly conservatives, do not want their tax dollars going to help others. They call it “socialism” as if it is an evil thing. Without tax dollars (like other civilized countries use), we are forced to rely on volunteers and non-profits and there just aren’t enough available to help this problem get solved. We need the funds to determine who needs what, obtain that, then distribute it.
So, when it comes down to it, money is a critical and necessary element to helping the millions of hungry and food insecure people of our country.
There is a massive food shortage in certain demographic areas. They are called food deserts. I didn’t hear about these until around 2016. Alot if the food deserts are located where food pickers live. Ironic isn’t it?
Wikipedia says a food desert is “an area that has limited access to affordable and nutritious food.” As such, an area with a “massive food shortage” is certainly a food desert, but the converse is not true. I think the distinction is important. To me, a massive food shortage sounds like famine and starvation. If there is starvation in the USA, then that is an emergency with clear solutions, e.g., our existing agricultural subsidies to drive down food prices. However, a food desert is a more subtle problem affecting a person’s health. Because ones health is also closely correlated with his personal choices, the solutions are less obvious.
If an area has limited access to healthy food, the solution is to provide that area with healthy food and make it available to those who need it. The solution is simple. The way we facilitate it (eg, through taxes or volunteers/donations only) is the obstacle.
There are people who don’t have enough to eat, but this is more a matter of access and distribution than one of overall food shortage. For example, poor schoolchildren who get their main meal at school, and then have little or nothing to eat on the weekends because their families can’t or don’t provide for them. The stores and restaurants are full of food, but it isn’t always in the hands of individuals who need it.
Is the problem solved by throwing money on top of it, or should the focus be on the root cause of the problem?
BFT4ME – both. Money is need to provide the food and means of distribution at the same time we work on the root cause. The cause of food insecurity, homelessness, addiction, etc is not an easy thing to address. We can’t not help those in dire need right now while we work as a society to solve these ever present issues.