Your answer is incarceration.
Only as a last resort for repeat offenders who refuse to live in assigned housing and participate in treatment programs.
Are you prepared to assume the burden (speaking about society, not you personally) the massive costs involved in what you’re suggesting?
First how do you identify the homeless? Those sleeping the streets. Is there any mechanism in place for the government to simply “round up” people sleeping under a bridge, in the bushes, or in a park if they haven’t committed a crime or violated an ordinance? Okay. Lets say yes.
- You pay the cops who could be arresting DWI offenders, investigating crimes, or doing other activities that I would argue help the greater good more than going into the park and arresting someone sleeping under a table and is a threat to no-one. Maybe you hire more cops; maybe you do not. Money
- You mentioned repeat offenders. Saying that jails are revolving doors is an understatement. The magistrate will likely cut a PR bond to these people (who will not show up for a court date—they don’t have calendars). In the mean time, there are the jailers who you are paying to house and feed the homeless inmates. Money.
- After the assessment that takes place, the offender is given the opportunity for treatment. The medical staff that is going to be employed to do the assessment is going to cost big time. Money.
- When the offender blows past his court date or leaves the program that they are enrolled in, a warrant is supposed to be issued for the arrest. The court clerks, the judge, the police who may need to testify, the DA….all cost money. Money.
Then, at some point, some of the original offenders will be re-arrested (More money). I don’t know how many times you want to repeat steps 1-4 to qualify for your “repeat offender” status but its going to cost you.
Then finally we arrive at incarceration.
What you’re suggesting is a massive outlay of cash that most communities do not have. Let alone if the “assessment” reveals a transmittable disease that public health officials will need to address, reveals an acute care problem that requires hospitalization, or reveals the worst of all possible outcomes…both. Then you involve other entities who are going to bill the State/City/County for their involvement.
—
I’m not suggesting your course of action is wrong or even that I disagree with it. The costs are, however going to be massive. There are also opportunity costs involved with the public sector services being allocated to homeless persons as opposed to hardened criminals or victims who want their day in court.
What I would suggest is essentially a reservation type of set-up like we have for native Americans. Essentially, it would be a State run minimum security jail on a plot of land, would serve about 12 counties or so and would take the persons you’ve identified. PubHealth, social services, and law enforcement employees from those counties would do the assessments and provide care/custody on a rotating basis (county A and B on Monday, County B and C on Tuesday, county D and E on Wednesday). There would be no savings involved in this as listed above but it would localize the problem, allow a response whose costs are shared across many counties, and would do what most want; get the homeless out of our line of sight. Lets be honest.
The issue, then, of course becomes what to do with the homeless once they serve their time.
A permanent reservation?