Ending the cycle of homelessness will require a multidisciplinary effort from government, religious, and mental health organizations. But part of the problem may be that some of these organizations have spread themselves too thin, like Mercy House, which operates facilities in five counties in California and Maricopa County in Arizona.

As a caregiver, I saw what happened to the Multiple Sclerosis Society’s Pacific Coast Chapter when it extended beyond Orange County to include San Diego County. That, at least, was within geographical bounds. Then, the decision was made to expand the Chapter to Hawaii. That’s when things began to fall apart.

Regional offices were closed. Employees who used to return phone calls and emails within 24 hours stopped responding entirely. The outgoing message on the main office number became increasingly impenetrable, like the Minotaur’s maze. Callers were referred to out-of-state “navigators” for assistance rather than in-state personnel intimately familiar with state regulations and assistance agencies. What used to take one phone call–getting a walker or other assistive device or help with an overdue utility bill–became a Herculean task, guaranteed to exhaust the most persistent caregiver. 

Three issues I’ve addressed with MH staff numerous times through the grievances/reasonable accommodations process that were even worse beforehand, according to the ACLU lawsuit: 1) The 24/7 use of lights in the dorms, turning residents into unpaid guinea pigs for an uncontrolled experiment on how 24/7 exposure to light affects the circadian rhythms of humans. (Note to ACLU SoCal: There might be an Eighth Amendment case here.) 2) The wonky sensors in 3/5ths of the bathroom sinks that allow water to flow even after people remove their hands, and 3) The inefficient shower system that a) has to be reset every 90 seconds and b) dispenses a spray that is literally painful to the skin, thus providing multiple disincentives for clients to use the showers. And there is still no hot water. The dispensers are geared so that the temperature can only be adjusted by repeatedly turning the faucets on and off, usually requiring 3-5 minutes. Then you might–might–get some lukewarm water going. That, and a sacrifice in obeisance to Poseidon.

None of these grievances have been addressed. Some nights, the majority of lights are turned down in dorms, only to be turned on full blast at 5 AM. Other nights, they are left on at the same lumen level all day, even when the sun is shining directly through the windows and doors, wasting electricity. The sinks are still wasting water by dispensing it even when no one is standing there. And the shower heads are still a pain, literally. In addition, there is an ongoing issue with non-working toilets and urinals (though with less frequency and more often due to residents’ abuse of facilities). Put it another way: this building’s Energy Star rating would be sub-par. 

The fact they’ve not been addressed begs two questions: 1) Why haven’t they been addressed? And 2) What about major issues involving clients that can’t be solved by flipping a switch or calling a plumber? 

And then there’s this absurd “lock-in/shut-out” policy, which has been a bane of shelter residents’ existence and the cause of lost hours and wages, as well as excessive car fees that could have been better spent elsewhere. While I understand that it is mandated by the county, it should be crystal clear from the plaintiffs’ testimony that it is a huge impediment to residents seeking gainful employment and independent living, while doing little or nothing to protect businesses nearby, and perpetuating stereotypes about unhoused persons.

The shelters in Anaheim and Buena Park do operate shuttles: two in the early AM, three in the afternoon, and early evening. There is a two-hour gap on average between shuttles and no service between 9 AM-2 PM. The drop-off points have to be approved either by Orange County Social Services, the facilities at those locations (Placentia), or the police in those cities (Anaheim, Buena Park, La Habra, and Brea). It is useful within these severe limitations. It is a Band-Aid on a gaping wound. 

In conclusion, going back to the lawsuit, what relief are the plaintiffs requesting from the Court? From the Writ:

1. The Court should issue a declaration, a writ of mandate, and an injunction prohibiting the Defendants from engaging in the unlawful conduct described above.
2. That the Court award damages and any applicable penalties for the acts described above, including punitive damages. 
3. That Plaintiffs be awarded attorneys’ fees and costs under Civil Code § 51.9, Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5, Government Code § 12965, and any other applicable law. 
4. Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper and just. 

So why did it take a lawsuit by the ACLU to even begin to redress these grievances? Why didn’t the organizations involved quietly work to fix these problems when they were duly notified by numerous residents instead of sticking their heads in the sand and pretending the problems didn’t exist? Because solving problems involves change. And no one likes change. But it is inevitable.