In this article, PadSplit CEO Atticus LeBlanc advocates for the passage of the Fair Chance at Housing Act, emphasizing its importance in addressing housing discrimination against individuals with criminal records. He argues that providing fair access to housing for formerly incarcerated individuals is crucial for reducing recidivism and promoting successful reintegration into society, ultimately benefiting both individuals and communities as a whole.
The recent Supreme Court decision in the Grants Pass case has ignited a firestorm of debate among housing advocates and policymakers. While many have condemned the ruling as a setback for homeless rights, it’s crucial to examine the broader implications of this decision on our approach to homelessness in America.
In City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, the Supreme Court effectively allowed cities to enforce laws prohibiting camping on public property, even when insufficient shelter space is available. The court stated that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment “does not require jurisdictions to allow sleeping or camping in all public places at all times.”
At first glance, this ruling might seem to give cities a free pass to criminalize homelessness. However, regardless of legal authority, it should be obvious to any reasonable person that criminalizing homelessness is neither a practical nor sustainable solution to the complex issues at hand, and cities will have to face this hard reality.
The Hard Truth About Working Homelessness
One of the most sobering realities of the current housing crisis is the prevalence of employed individuals among the homeless population. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, in 2018, 44% of homeless individuals reported some form of employment income. This statistic underscores a harsh truth: for many Americans, a steady job is no longer a guarantee of stable housing. In my work with PadSplit, an affordable housing marketplace, we hear stories daily of full-time workers who are functionally homeless who have leveraged our platform to find their first stable home in years. The Washington Post highlighted this harsh reality just last week, noting that the number of unhoused Americans is higher today than at any point during the Great Recession, and that more and more of these individuals are also clocking in to full-time jobs everyday.
The Practical Limitations of Criminalization
While the Supreme Court’s decision may give cities the legal authority to enforce anti-camping laws, it does nothing to address the root causes of homelessness. Writing for the dissent, Justice Sotomayor noted that “Grants Pass has made it a crime to be homeless in Grants Pass.” But making homelessness illegal doesn’t make it disappear; and it does little to address the myriad of factors contributing to the crisis.
Cities attempting to solve homelessness through criminalization would quickly find themselves facing practical and ethical dilemmas, including overcrowded jails, increased public spending on incarceration, disruption of employment for working homeless individuals, exacerbation of mental health and substance abuse issues, and erosion of trust between law enforcement and vulnerable populations. It just isn’t an economical, ethical, or practical solution, and I refuse to believe that any functioning American city legitimately believes they can solve homelessness by threat of incarceration.
The Core Issue: Lack of Affordable and Accessible Housing
At the heart of the homelessness crisis lies a fundamental shortage of affordable housing options. The National Low Income Housing Coalition reports that the U.S. has a shortage of 7 million affordable rental homes for extremely low-income renters. This shortage is the bedrock upon which the current crisis is built.
However, the issue goes beyond just supply. Even when affordable housing exists, many individuals find themselves unable to access it due to high barriers to entry. This is where the focus needs to shift.
The Path Forward: Removing Barriers to Housing Access
Rather than viewing the Grants Pass decision as a green light for criminalization, cities should see it as a call to action for developing comprehensive, humane solutions to homelessness. The most critical and often overlooked strategy in this fight is removing barriers to housing access – an approach that organizations like PadSplit have championed and one that every nonprofit provider of services to the homeless recognizes as vital.
Even when sufficient housing supply exists, high barriers to entry prevent many individuals from accessing it. Traditional requirements like 3x income-to-rent ratios, large upfront security deposits, and minimum credit scores can prevent housing access for millions of full-time US workers from accessing any traditional apartment. In fact, 22.8M rental households, over half of all renters wouldn’t even be approved for the average 1 bedroom apartment at $1,400 using these standard underwriting guidelines.
A recent conversation with a homeless shelter director in Atlanta illuminates this issue starkly. He shared that due to the high barriers to entry and the nearly $3,000 required to access a traditional apartment, he places approximately 80% of the men graduating from his program with PadSplit, where the average cost of entry for a furnished room in a shared home is under $300. This statistic underscores the critical role that accessible housing options play in transitioning individuals out of homelessness.
It suggests that a significant portion of homeless individuals could potentially afford housing if not for these artificial barriers. By focusing on removing these obstacles, we can create a more fluid and accessible housing market that allows individuals to transition more easily from homelessness or precarious housing situations into stable accommodations.
Strategies for Increasing Housing Accessibility
What does accessible housing actually mean? And how should we, as a society, and especially policymakers, consider more accessible options? In my 20+ years of working in urban planning and with the last 15 years devoted to practical housing options, here are some proven options:
1. Flexible Qualification Criteria: Encouraging landlords and property managers to adopt more flexible qualification criteria is crucial. This could include lower income requirements, removal of credit checks, or programs that allow for gradual saving towards security deposits. PadSplit has already proven that removing upfront barriers doesn’t translate to lower collections rates (97.5%+ collections rate over 7 years)
2. Deposit Assistance Programs: Implementing city or state-run programs that provide deposit assistance or low-interest loans for security deposits can help individuals overcome the initial financial hurdle of securing housing.
3. Rent Reporting Services: Adopting services that report rent payments to credit bureaus can help individuals build credit history, making it easier for them to qualify for housing in the future. Our early partnership with Esusu has empowered thousands of people to improve or even establish credit scores for the first time.
4. Master Leasing Programs: Cities or nonprofits can lease units and then sublease them to individuals who might not qualify on their own, taking on some of the risk that landlords are often unwilling to accept.
5. Housing Navigation Services: Providing dedicated support to help individuals navigate the complex process of finding and securing housing, including assistance with applications and negotiations with landlords.
6. Innovative Housing Models: Supporting and expanding co-living models like PadSplit that prioritize accessibility alongside affordability, providing immediate housing solutions for those who might otherwise be shut out of the market.
The Role of Public-Private Partnerships
Addressing these barriers effectively requires collaboration between government agencies, nonprofits, and private sector companies. Cities can partner with organizations to create and scale innovative housing solutions that address both affordability and accessibility.
These partnerships can leverage the efficiency and innovation of the private sector while ensuring that public policy goals around housing access are met. By working together, we can create a new paradigm of housing that is both affordable and accessible to those who need it most.
Long-Term Benefits and Conclusion
By focusing on removing barriers to entry, we’re not just addressing immediate housing needs – we’re providing a foundation for long-term stability and self-sufficiency. When individuals have stable housing, they’re better positioned to maintain employment, address health issues, and engage positively with their communities.
Instead of viewing this ruling as permission to criminalize poverty, cities should see it as an urgent reminder of the work that lies ahead. The true measure of our society’s progress will not be found in how effectively we can remove visible signs of homelessness from our streets but in how compassionately and effectively we can address its root causes.
As professionals in the housing sector, policymakers, and concerned citizens, we must push for innovative, humane solutions that recognize the dignity of every individual, regardless of their housing status. By focusing on making housing more accessible, we can create pathways out of homelessness that benefit individuals and communities alike.
The Supreme Court’s decision may have settled a legal question, but it has only intensified the moral and practical challenges we face. It’s time to move beyond the debate over criminalization and focus on creating cities where everyone has the opportunity to access safe, stable, and affordable housing. This is not just a matter of policy – it’s a testament to our values as a society and our commitment to the well-being of all our citizens.
Originally published in Atticus LeBlanc’s LinkedIn newsletter, One Room at a Time.
