Friday Round Up

Homelessness, capital gains, and other tidbits from this week.

I will try and get back to writing more frequently, but it has been nice to just breathe this week and get a reset. Having said that, I am working on something here, a chronology of the past year, based on e-mails and these Substacks. I am curious what it will show and more on that as the project continues. Let’s start with a few things from around California.

Homelessness

The “big reveal” of the Governor’s State of the State was his contention there was a 9% drop in people living on the streets. “The biggest drop in years,” he claimed. It was a big boost to the Governor’s Presidential ambitions. Victory for $24 billion spent over the past 5 years. The wins wash away the years of failure and allegations of waste or so the messaging wills ay. We finally made progress.

However, “all that glitters isn’t gold,” even in our Golden State.

Let’s be sure we use the proper terms when defining “homelessness,” as Liam Dillon discusses in his abridged interview with others discussing homelessness published in Politico this week.

Living on the streets does not mean people are no longer homeless.

In fact, nobody really knows the number. The reason for the sudden decline in the Governor’s last year? Again, no one really knows. Politico discussed potential reasons, but one thing missing from the entire discussion? The one thing which might have had the greatest effect? It was not the $24 billion spent. It was not the programs. It might not even have been the CARE Courts the Governor advocated for. It was potentially the Supreme Court decision overturning Grant’s Pass v. Johnson, the 9th Circuit decision which held western cities from clearing homeless encampments if there were not enough beds available. It was decided at the end of June in 2024. Advocates hated the decision. They were able to focus policy on all these other paths, including the massive monies spent to little effect. The 9th Circuit decision gave us Measure A in Los Angeles County and LACAHSA. It gave us $24 billion spent statewide. It grew the “homeless industrial complex” considerably. It gave us billions more from the federal government. It gave us increased homelessness. It tried to give us dignity for those affected, but did it?

By the time our Government starts moving mid-late 2024, well, guess what, you will see a drop by the end of 2025, about 18 months later. What else is not discussed? CARE Courts, the Governor’s initiative to take some steps toward homeless people having a new Guardian over their affairs? These steps were implemented throughout 2024. Were the CARE Courts a step in the right direction? One can only guess by the reduction of the 9% on the streets. Still, I would think these two policy decisions, the CARE Courts and the ability to clear encampments, when used, must have had an effect on the overall homeless number. What could be even better? Living wage jobs for the 40% who are employed but homeless, reducing 4x the number the Governor is taking credit for, but I digress. I know someone who was trying to do that goal (hint hint).

Capital Gains Reduction for Homeowners

Back in December, AEI took the step of calling for changes to the Federal Capital Gains Exemption for homeowners in the Wall Street Journal’s opinion pages. This week, the topic was in the Journal again. Twice in 30 days? The Journal is unsubtly telling the President, et al what we have known for a while- boomers need to get out of their houses and need a carrot to do so. It is more than affordability, it is about wealth, and we need to get people moving to get people into homes and building wealth. Unlocking the housing tied up by boomers will increase the housing stock in our nation quicker than anything, especially in low-growth areas like California, New York, et cetera. We could also use a derivative of the concept for our fire victims who are forced to sell but will be hit with huge capital gains taxes on their lots, something we have advocated for back in DC this fall for the federals to have something they can do to affect the rebuild.

Let’s also remember our Prop 13 ideas for California. It goes beyond fire (disaster) victims. A stick alongside the carrot. Speed requires unlocking tied up assets.

Affordability is not a mantra, it is only the surface of the problem, “smart enough to be dangerous but not smart enough to solve the issue.” Affordability is not a solution since it needs to incorporate wealth. As Ruben Gallegos, the Senator from Arizona said, it is about Prosperity (a better term than wealth). Wealth is aspirational, affordability is not. It is a trap. It is regressive. It is UnAmerican (yes I said it).

To see an entire generation frozen out of the housing market in big cities, denied the opportunity to build wealth, is a travesty, especially if it is because of the “political expedience” of it (read Altadena and federal funds versus home grown). You do not think politicals are cynical? Read the quip about Maine legislators and them thinking solutions will disincentivize Congress from finding solutions for their political gains. Altadena, do I need so say anything more about our financial stasis and why we are here?

You do not think certain electeds would use a generation and keep them dependent on “affordability” for their own political gains? You do not think the Ends would not Justify the Means? Well, take a look at who is saying “affordability” instead of “wealth.” Those people were trained in the “ends justifying the means.”

Wealth starts with housing in this nation, it always has. Wealth is what our nation needs. It is what keeps us growing, keeps people believing, keeps us united. Housing is the single biggest asset most Americans will ever have. It starts at home, with the stock currently available. So, we need a path to get there. The Journal is identifying one key roadblock. California, Prop 13 is another.

Prop 50 Gets Upheld

The courts ruled 2-1 that Prop 50 will be upheld. No shock there. The Supreme Court is indicating it will allow States to determine their own path, whether it is Texas or California. Big meh on this one. I still will die on this hill friend(s) to say the whole episode is a waste and will affect the D’s way more than the R’s.

Media Landscape Shift in Los Angeles

We are getting a bunch of new media in and around Los Angeles in the coming weeks. The New York Post is creating an outpost here as was reported last summer. The Post is not alone. The Los Angeles Times had a listing of all the entrants this week, many of whom are alumni of our venerable LA Times. The one which interested me was the LA Local, which received over $19 million from philanthropic sources. That is a big number. Interesting move if you ask me- supporting local media and the community organizations around those media narratives. Be careful, philanthropy might not be as “nonpartisan” as one would think. Just keep it on your radar.

Around Altadena

It has been kinda quiet this week. We published a couple podcasts, which went live yesterday. There is some noise about environmental issues bubbling up to the surface around Altadena, but nothing concrete yet. I think a lot of people are exhausted after the lead up to the anniversary. I know I was. I am sure you readers are too.

A Year Ago This Week

As I am compiling my chronology, here is what was going on a week ago this week.

January 12, 2025- Governor Newsom and Supervisor Barger got copies of the original AB 797 draft which was introduced in February of 2025.

January 14 ,2025- Governor Newsom issues the Executive Order limiting predatory contact from buyers contacting victims of the fires to sell their lots.

January 17, 2025- Spoke with Supervisor’s office about the use of Community Reinvestment Act dollars and hoped she could carry the message to the incoming President who was in contact with her at the time. Representatives from our community were at the Inaugural Balls on January 20, 2025 and be ready to go when President was taking office to begin rebuilding.

Yes Altadena, we were already working on plans. Have a good weekend.