Un-Separating Church and State...
Once again Maine leads the way--only this time the enemy is homelessness
In order to combat homelessness, Vice President Kamala Harris recently said that, if elected President in two months, she’d build 3 million new homes in 4 years. Three million new affordable homes would be huge, given the fact that the Biden-Harris Administration’s official homeless population figure is “only” about 675,000.
Predictably, her opponents have attacked her plan, calling it “unrealistic,” “unfeasible,” “certain to stoke inflation,” yada-yada. On the other end of the spectrum, the recently released film, Reagan, reminds me that The Gipper once said “Government isn’t the solution; government is the problem.” (But President Reagan didn’t really believe this. It was rhetoric, specifically targeted at a particular problem of his choosing. Like Adam Smith, the patron saint of Free Marketeers, Reagan wielded the government to aid and abet things he regarded as Good, and criticized “big government” when it obstructed his aims.)
As a staunch political independent, with a fair bit of training and experience in the areas of law, economics and real estate, I applaud the compassionate spirit of Harris’ plan, but would like to propose a practical middle ground, a Purple Approach that I feel could dramatically reduce homelessness—whoever our next President is…
This middle ground is distinctively Maine-ish in nature.
Saying Maine folk tend to be thrifty is sort of like saying Kenyans and Ethiopians are pretty fair long-distance runners. But my experience with the men, women and children of Maine tells me their thrift is married with other virtues—ingenuity, moxie, grit, and, especially, “the better angels of our nature”…which, combined, suggest a way to combat a problem that’s pretty much on everyone’s minds these days…because it’s also on just about everyone’e eyes these days…owing to the fact that, wherever we’re walking or driving, we’re likely to run into an apparently homeless man holding a cardboard Help sign at an intersection, a woman sleeping on a grate, or a group of children sharing a tent beneath a concrete overpass…
I began studying this sad situation in the early 1980s, as well as working in shelters and soup kitchens, so I’ve seen how the Homeless/Unsheltered/Affordable Housing subject has evolved and shape-shifted over the years. It’s very complex, not given to siloed approaches or sound-bite solutions. Many health-related issues are baked into the problem, as are economic issues, criminal justice issues, climate issues, and—of course—politics.
To this bubbling and at times overheated melting pot, I’d like to stir in some religion…(of, if you prefer, “spirituality”).
Despite such complexities, confusing semantics, and causal murkiness, one thing is crystal clear: the problem is getting worse; despite our Government (from the feds all the way down to the smallest unincorporated hamlets) spending hundreds of billions of dollars to combat it.
On the national level, in a 2023 press release, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (aka HUD) said it awarded $2.8 billion to combat homelessness, with a stated goal to “reduce homelessness by 25%, by 2025.” But based on where we are today it’s more likely that homelessness will have increased by 25%.
In California, where I live, the problem almost seems insoluble. Despite spending hundreds of billions over the past few decades, and placing hundreds of thousands into homes, and a decline in the State’s total population—the homeless population has increased. In some places, it’s ballooned.
Homelessness is like some alien monster in a sci-fi flick that—the more you zap it with a ray gun—the stronger it gets. Though the State accounts for just 12% of the USA’s population, 33% of the country’s homeless live in California. In 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom devoted 95% of his State of the State speech to combatting homelessness; then put his money (or, the taxpayers’!) where his mouth was, committing $17.5 billion (in reality, much more) to solve the problem, over 4 years. Similarly, in 2022, on Day 1, LA’s new mayor, Karen Bass, declared a State of Emergency in order to combat the problem. For the past 5 years, LA has found “permanent housing” for 100,000; yet there are more “homeless” today than 5 years ago.
What!
How can that be?
Is this just another illustration of the maxim “There are lies, damn lies, and statistics”?
Cynicism aside, one good reference is the 2021 New York Times article “How Many Americans Are Homeless? No One Knows.” Another is the 2023 Atlantic article: “The Obvious Answer to Homelessness: And Why Everyone’s Ignoring It.” (I respectfully disagree with the author’s thesis and conclusion, but the issues are reasonably well-sketched, and the figures are mostly accurate.)
One thing to remember: if someone has a roof over their head, they still need to eat, feed their children, take meds, etc. This is why, even though the U.S. government says there are “only” 675,000 homeless people, there are still in fact millions of people at intersections, along sidewalks, outside convenience and liquor stores, etc. asking for money. There are another 20-30 million or so who are really stretched, really worried they’ll soon become homeless…if they need a big medical procedure, their car breaks down, etc. This is especially hard to fathom (and justify) given the fact that the USA is home to more than 2,000 billionaires.
As an additional tragic twist, as is so often the case, the most vulnerable sub-groups are hardest hit. For instances, veterans and African-Americans are far more likely to be homeless.
Also, despite the perception and media reports, the problem is not confined just to big, urban areas. Where I live, in the very low-density, largely rural San Luis Obispo County, homelessness has increased 53% in just the past 4 years, which translates into the country’s third highest homeless rate per capita. As I’ve been volunteering at the 40 Prado Center since 2019, I can attest to the fact that it’s one of the country’s best, most “holistic” centers. There are free beds, meals, kennels, medical services, vocational services, parking, lots of staff and volunteers. This was before Jeff Bezos gave 40 Prado $5 million, in 2022. Yet the rate of homelessness continues to climb.
For the past several years, Bezos has donated $100 million/year to help the homeless. Apple has committed $2.5 billion—just in California. They join many other companies and individuals fighting the Good Fight…but seeming to hardly make a dent.
On the government side, the money spent by State and local officials to reduce homelessness could have paid the rent for every single homeless man, woman and child in California; with lots left over for food, medicine, and clothing.
That’s worth re-stating:
On the government side, the money spent by State and local officials to reduce homelessness could have paid the rent for every single homeless man, woman and child in California; with lots left over for food, medicine, and clothing.
This all highlights a myopia I’ve seen for 50 years, not just as regards homelessness but also in education and palliative care, with which I’ve also been active: “‘throwing money’ at a problem” often makes things worse. Money can be a crutch, a seeming “magic pill” or panacea. A sound strategy plus a small amount of catalytic financing beats a poorly conceived strategy and all the money in the world; every time.
Which brings us back to the Maine mentality…
The people of Maine excel at making a little go a very long way. Mildred of Skowhegan won’t move her basket to another wild blueberry bush until she’s plucked every single one of the tiny sweet fruits. Likewise, Max of Scarborough wouldn’t dream of buying a new lobster trap until after he’d patched, plugged, soldered and done everything else earthly possible to salvage the trap his father had passed to him, as his dad’s dad had done. Scottish blood runs thick in Maine. Ben Franklin was probably talking about the people of Maine when he wrote “Waste not, want not.”
Union Col. Joshua Chamberlain is perhaps the most famous son of Maine. His thrifty use of real estate and ammo, coupled with his incredibly courageous and ingenious out-of-ammo bayonet charge, turned the tide at Gettysburg.
But my personal favorite native is Rufus Jones, who, it just so happens, was born in 1863, the very same year Chamberlain led the storied charge of the 20th Maine Volunteer Infantry at Little Round Top—to save the day and, arguably, the Union.
Jones did what most Maine kids did 150 or so years ago: chop a heckuva lot of wood, pick a heckuva lot of berries, fish to get “free” food, and always keep an eye peeled for those ornery Moose. His parents kept him extremely busy: working, schooling (his formal education began at age 4 1/2, then he had to walk 3 miles each way as a teen), swimming in China Lake. They also kept him busy in the “spiritual” arena. He attended Quaker services at least twice a week, said grace over every meal, and participated whenever traveling Quakers (aka members of The Society of Friends) came a-calling at the Jones family farm, which was often.
Jones lived about as far away from “civilization” as one could back then, having been born in South China, midway between tiny South Vassalboro and minuscule Dirigo Corner. His main contact with outsiders were the Quakers visiting from Philadelphia and Boston. One thing led to another, and Rufus told his folks he wanted to attend Haverford. His mother said “Why? You don’t need to go to college.” His father added “Who else is gonna chop all that wood in the back forty acres? I’m gettin’ on in years.” But Rufus pressed and his parents didn’t stand in his way. He went on to teach at Haverford for several decades, inspire and mentor Gandhi (whom he met in India) as regards nonviolence, and found the American Friend Service Committee, still the only religious organization ever to be awarded a Nobel Prize.
Jones had an illustrious career. He feared no one, and was willing to meet, talk, and work with anyone he felt could help ease suffering. Before Germany invaded Poland, Jones got Hitler to agree to allow the Quakers to help Jews emigrate, but the program didn’t get very far before the Blitzkrieg…
One of the reasons Hitler agreed to help Jones aid (even) the Jews was on account of what Jones had done to help the Germans after World War One.
In 1920, after the Somme was finally rinsed of all the blood, and the ink on the Treaty of Versailles was finally dry, the depredation of WWI’s horrific guns and mustard gas came into sharp relief. 40 million* were dead or wounded, many grievously (* = approx. 200 million today). Hundreds of millions were suffering from PTSD (it was called “shell shock”). Trillions (in 2024 dollars) worth of homes, shops, factories, and buildings were obliterated. Tens of millions of square miles of farmland were despoiled. Cows, chickens and other livestock were as rare as diamonds.
What also came into focus was a new tragedy, a typical byproduct of war: starvation of the innocents. In Germany alone, millions of children were starving, or close to it. Many of them recently orphaned.
What to do?
The once-mighty Great Britain and the western European Powers were impotent, exhausted, their coffers depleted. To the east, massive, fertile Russia was embroiled in a bloody Marxist Revolution.
Would the “collateral damage” continue? Would tens of millions more perish?
No…thanks to Uncle Sam and Rufus Jones.
Herbert Hoover, who led the American Relief Association, reached out to his fellow Quaker. Their conversation went something like this:
Hoover: “Friend, millions of innocent German children are starving and no one knows what to do about it. Might thee help?”
Jones: “Friend, what does thee propose?”
Hoover: “The United States Treasury will provide some funding, if thee can provide some Friends to administer the program. Deal?”
Jones: “Deal.”
Jones enlisted 15 Quakers.
Let that figure sink in for a moment….
That’s the size of an NBA basketball team.
Jones’ team of Quakers enlisted, then supervised 40,000 Germans.
40,000 exceeds the capacity of Sacramento’s Golden 1 Center and Boston’s TD Garden—combined.
Pretty soon, this Church-State joint venture was feeding more than 1,200,000—a day.
1.2 million exceeds the population of Sacramento and Boston—combined. It’s also just shy of twice the official U.S. homeless population.
(Uncle Sam and the Quakers worked in other countries too, especially Russia.)
What the Quakers did is one of the best proofs of Margaret Meade’s wonderful quote: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.”
Based on my 50 year-experience working with the homeless, in real estate, and with a variety of religious institutions (including the Quakers, Jewish community centers, and Habitat for Humanity), I’m convinced that a Joint Venture along the lines of what was done in Germany a century ago could greatly ameliorate homelessness.
Along what lines?
Uncle Sam should work with America's churches, synagogues, temples and mosques. There are about 350,000 “congregations” in the USA. However, one study estimates that, on average, only 65 people attend the average “worship service.”
Admittedly, some congregations meet in small rural churches. Some are beehives of activity—busy much of the day and night, with various services and auxiliary activities, from the Girl Scouts to Kiwanis. Some already do a lot of work in this area; they only have so much bandwidth.
However, many congregations meet in vast structures that are, 95% of the time—empty. Most of these are among the 24,000 Catholic or Orthodox churches (the 350k figure also includes 314,000 Protestant churches, and 12,000 non-Christian houses of worship) that have seen their congregations shrink so much since the structures were built. This hollowing out has accelerated rapidly over the past 30 years. In 1993, 90% of Americans self-identified as “Christian.” Today, the figure is 63%.
When I attended the early morning Mass at Washington’s St. Matthew’s Cathedral in the 1990s, I sat amongst 25-30 other parishioners. The Cathedral can seat 1,200.
What’s more, some of the largest properties (again, typically Catholic or Orthodox buildings and grounds) are situated right smack dab where homelessness is most acute: downtown LA, Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore.
True, “re-purposing” old cathedrals involves a heckuva a lot more than slapping on a coat of paint and buying some beds from IKEA. It requires money, even for Maine folk.
On the other hand, we’re not talking anywhere near the same high costs involved in, say, converting vacant class A offices into high-priced condos. The new purpose would be utilitarian, much in the way Andrew Carnegie was ferociously frugal when building all his free libraries. Finally, much of the property is comprised of parking lots or vacant land, on which “micro homes,” or other residential units can be built at very low cost (such as the 50 “cabins” recently built in Grover Beach, California).
Also true: most real estate issues (i.e., zoning, taxes) are governed by State and/or local law. This for sure imposes challenges as regards “ramp-up” and “scalability.” However, the federal government can play a huge—catalytic—role. The Department of the Treasury (e.g., tax code), the Department of the Interior (e.g., Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service), the Department of Defense (e.g., so many bases have closed or have vast tracts of underutilized land), plus billions of dollars in appropriations and myriad programs under the auspices of HUD, HHS, etc.
To some extent, but in small, non-integrated or -strategized baby steps, Uncle Sam is already teaming with myriad congregations, from deep-Red Indianapolis to deep-Blue Berkeley.
This is a good thing. This is definitely a non-partisan issue!
Perhaps that’s why Maine is leading the way—again. It’s famously independent.
Take the City of Westbrook (a Portland suburb), which is deliberating a new ordinance that would allow not just churches but private homes and a variety of other property types—to house the homeless. Also, in Augusta, a small non-profit group is trying to raise $650,000 in order to buy the Green Street United Methodist Church, and re-purpose it to house the homeless. Built in 1828, the Church has 16,000 square feet of interior space (plus acres of surrounding property); yet only 35 people attend worship services. According to pastor the Rev. Angela Rotherman, "If we have unused space that can be used to house people, from a Christian point of view, that's our calling to meet people's basic needs.”
On the other end of the continent, in California, in Berkeley, Pasadena, and elsewhere, churches and governments have teamed up to re-purpose real estate…to achieve what everyone in real estate seeks to attain: the Best and Highest Use.
But there are always flies in the ointment, as suggested by this opening sentence in a local newspaper:
“Homeless individuals in Pasadena will soon have even more places to lay their heads at night including, controversially, in church parking lots.” [emphasis added]
[Let that word—controversially—sink in for a moment…]
“For decades, Trinity Lutheran Church was the only church in Pasadena with a permit that allowed overnight parking site for the homeless, to sleep in their cars.”
[Let that word—permit—sink in for a moment…]
“But then the City Council approved a pilot program that allows all religious locations in commercial sites to also have overnight parking.”
[Let that word—commercial—sink in for a moment…meaning, people can’t reside in residential areas, just commercial ones.]
"I think it's going to be great," said Trinity Lutheran Church Pastor the Rev. Sharon Richter. "If more churches and synagogues and temples, because it's all religious facilities, not just Christian, would allow this in their very underused parking lots, I think we could solve most of the [problem].”
Meanwhile, 500 miles to the north, another experiment is underway…
As the words “controversial,” “permit” and “commercial” imply, even generally progressive Californians don’t always see eye-to-eye when it comes to alleviating homelessness. At least not when the remediation is proposed in their backyard, as evidenced in the following Hollywood Reporter headline from February, 2024:
Beverly Hills in Crisis as Judge Mandates New Affordable Housing: “People Are Furious”
[Let that word—crisis—sink in for a moment…Crisis like with a tsunami—crashing into the Santa Monica Pier? An earthquake opening up a vast chasm—into which Century City disappears ? A raging wildfire—that engulfs Hollywood Hills?]
Not quite…
About 32,000 people live in Beverly Hills. Until just recently, the law only required the City to provide 3 “affordable” housing units. When a study said that, in order to comply not just with the law but the spirit of a truly progressive and humanitarian housing policy, the City needed to build another 3,000 units—all hell broke loose. When residents vociferously objected and dug in their heels, a judge blocked all renovations, from minor bathroom upgrades to $25 million down-to-the-studs remodels—until the residents relented. They didn’t relent; they filed an appeal. The judge temporarily lifted his ban…
The crisis is ongoing, and will be for some time…
This sort of NIMBY push-back is being played out in hundreds (if not thousands) of communities all across the country. This isn’t to say that those who are challenging the location of affordable housing units don't often have some valid points. They often do. But, by the same token, many of the objections and “problems” are blown way out of proportion by real estate speculators, developers or others whose motives are, let’s just say, not as civic-minded….
The Green Street Methodist, Trinity Lutheran, and All Souls Episcopal initiatives are wonderful, but they’re like fingers in a dike. For instance, Trinity’s addition of 35 units over a 10-year period won’t help much when, over the same time-frame, 350 more people need a roof over their head. And while adding a few hundred parking spaces helps, 99% of these spaces are uncovered, so the people using them must have a vehicle, yet most homeless do not.
So: whoever ends up in The White House, whatever their personal spiritual persuasion…I urge them to borrow a page from The American Friends Service Committee, and, once again, show the world that, while it’s good policy to separate Church and State—we’re all part of the same team; a team is fundamentally all about serving others; and we’ve all got the same engine under our hood: a can-do American Spirit.
What’s needed is a Moonshot mentality, anchored in a Maine sensibility. Our next President should appoint one person, along the lines of President Wilson appointing Hoover. (Please, let’s call them a champion, a steward, anything other than a czar or czarina! Generally speaking, Imperial Russian monarchs weren’t known to have been efficient or terribly interested in helping the serfs of other marginalized segments of society!) This person should be authorized to cut through all Red Tape, efficiently disburse, and transparently account for the use of taxpayer funds in the same way JFK empowered NASA in the 1960s.
If Uncle Sam creatively and properly incentivizes religious institutions—via, say, turbo-charged-tax credits for the parishioners (the institutions are non-taxable), the results could be transformative. If just 5% of the country’s 350,000 congregations were, on average, to house 40 people—POOF! No more homeless.
And, isn’t this what all the major religions preach—helping the less fortunate? Isn’t homelessness—like slavery—just the sort of thing Religion should be fighting?
When Americans set their minds to achieve a goal—anything is possible.
It’s time to set our mind to ending homelessness.
To do so, let’s think like they do in Mane, and follow the lead of Rufus Jones.
You're a brilliant writer and researcher, Eric. I'm sharing this article with several friends.