Un caso de Oregón que pronto será visto por la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos podría tener una gran repercusión en la forma en que las ciudades tratan a las personas sin hogar. Los argumentos a favor de 'Johnson versus Grants Pass' están programados para el 22 de abril. Se trata de una orden de la ciudad de Grants Pass que prohíbe a las personas dormir en público, incluida la prohibición del uso de mantas y almohadas.

Loren Naldoza trabaja en el Oregon Food Bank, y presentó un escrito con otras 15 organizaciones del estado en apoyo a los demandantes. Dice que la falta de vivienda no es una elección de estilo de vida.

"Es un estado involuntario porque ha habido sistemas o crisis (como nuestra crisis de vivienda, por el costo de vida o crisis personales) que están impactando a personas en todo el estado, que convergen y dificultan que la gente tenga una vivienda estable," asegura Naldoza.

El Tribunal del 9º Distrito dictaminó a favor de los demandantes que la ley de Grants Pass viola la Octava Enmienda contra castigos crueles e inusuales. Los partidarios de la ley de Grants Pass dicen que debe permitirse a las ciudades decidir sus propias políticas y no al gobierno federal.

Naldoza afirma que criminalizar a las personas sin hogar no es una herramienta eficaz y sólo crearía más hambre y pobreza. Dice que las personas que salen del sistema de justicia penal se enfrentan a muchas dificultades diferentes.

"Lo que se obtiene al final son antecedentes penales," dice Naldoza, "lo que hace mas difícil para las personas que han estado sin hogar encontrar un lugar seguro, estable o accesible al que llamar hogar. Y también es difícil conseguir un empleo remunerado, especialmente si el empleo requiere una verificación de antecedentes o licencia."

Naldoza afirma que hay formas más eficaces de abordar esta crisis.

"En lo que realmente necesitamos invertir es en atención, compasión, tratamiento y otros recursos que la gente necesita para salir de su experiencia de quedarse sin hogar," concluye Naldoza.

Los Angeles faces a severe shortage of affordable housing but Monday, the city is asking a judge to put a hold on a lawsuit which aims to clear the way for new development.

The City Council approved permits three years ago for the Venice Dell complex, which would provide new housing units meant for low-income families and people experiencing homelessness. However, developers have yet to break ground on the project. The lawsuit, filed by the LA Forward Institute and community members, claims LA Council member Traci Park and City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto have deliberately held up the project.

Katie McKeon, attorney at the Western Center on Law and Poverty, said the developer has made many concessions but the city continues to drag its feet.

"The developers made some design tweaks to take away some of the architectural features that many residents didn't like," McKeon noted. "They have committed to construct a parking structure replacing every single one of the parking spaces that's currently on the lot now."

Council member Park did not respond to a request for comment but has previously argued for a transportation hub in the area. City Attorney Feldstein Soto has criticized the project as too expensive. The Coastal Commission already approved the Venice Dell project but the City Transportation Commission opposed it. The city has not moved to tear down an aging building on the site.

McKeon claimed the city is working against its stated goal to ease the housing crisis.

"The city is spending quite a large amount of money to not build housing because they are defending all of these lawsuits that are saying, 'You should be building this housing. Why are you not building this housing?'" McKeon observed.

The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles has filed two additional lawsuits seeking to compel the city to allow Venice Dell to proceed.

Advocates for homeownership in Oregon are celebrating a new bill which sets targets to boost the state's homeownership rate, currently at 64%, just below the national average but among the lowest in the country.

The bill sets a goal of 65% by 2030, with incremental increases every five years until 2045.

Shannon Vilhauer, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Oregon, said while the state also needs more rental housing, homeownership brings many long-term benefits, including better education outcomes for children.

"We just don't want to lose sight of this important wealth building, stabilizing opportunity for all of our communities," Vilhauer explained. "As we prioritize production together, let's keep homeownership in the mix."

On the heels of the victory, Vilhauer was shocked to hear the current state budget nearly zeros out funding for homeownership assistance programs, which does not set the state up well to begin meeting the new goal. She stressed Habitat will do everything it can to restore the funding.

Vilhauer added for most people living in Oregon and the United States today, homeownership is affordable housing.

"If you were fortunate enough to buy your home in Oregon 20 years ago, your mortgage payment today is less than half of market rate rent for a two-bedroom apartment," Vilhauer pointed out.

Brock Nation, policy director for Oregon Realtors, said results from a survey last year found about three quarters of non-homeowners consider homeownership to be one of their highest life priorities.

"Those numbers were even higher for communities of color, where we know there's about a 15.3% racial homeownership gap in the state of Oregon right now," Nation outlined.

For communities of color, he reported about 96% of people put homeownership at the top of their priority list.

Gov. Bob Ferguson has signed Washington's first rent stabilization law and renters and advocates who fought for the bill are breathing sighs of relief, after years of effort.

The new law caps the amount landlords can raise yearly rents at 7% plus inflation or 10%, whichever is less. For manufactured homes, increases are limited to 5%.

Caroline Hardy, secretary of the Leisure Manor Tenants Association and a retiree in Aberdeen whose manufactured home community faced up to 50% yearly increases under new corporate ownership. She said her community is mostly seniors living on fixed incomes and the increases had become untenable.

"It was getting to the point where people were skipping meals and they were not able to afford prescriptions," Hardy recounted. "I couldn't afford my diabetic medicine. It was getting scary and we were getting mad."

Landlords associations and real estate agencies fought hard against the bill, saying it would impede development. Proponents countered under the law, new construction is protected from the cap for the first 12 years.

Hardy spent three years knocking on doors, making phone calls and testifying in support of the new law. She said she was deeply relieved to hear it passed and is grateful to Sen. Emily Alvarado, D-Seattle, and Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, who sponsored the bill.

"We were so thankful that they listened to us, and they helped us," Hardy added. "It was a great accomplishment. We're really proud of ourselves."

Nine Washington counties had record-breaking eviction rates in 2024. The state now joins Oregon and California as the only states in the nation to enact a statewide limit on how much landlords can raise the rent.


get more stories like this via email