Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County, Inc.

www.cabinc.org/Impact_of_Downtown_Ordinances.htm

Impact of the City of Santa Cruz Downtown Ordinances on People Who Get Their Daily
Living Money From Panhandling

Panhandling or begging is a significant source of income for many homeless people in Santa Cruz County. In order to determine the possible numbers of people who might be impacted by city ordinances that may discourage panhandling a good source of information is the Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000 Census and Needs Assessment Report.
The report is a presentation of the findings of a Census and Needs Assessment Survey conducted by Applied Survey Research (ASR) in March and April of 2000 for the Community Assessment Project of Santa Cruz County under the auspices of the United Way.
The report included questions about income including panhandling. From the report it is clear that as many as 11% of the survey respondents get their daily living money from Panhandling, more than SSI or General Assistance.[1] We can project, potentially, 350 homeless people in Santa Cruz County may panhandle at any given time or 940 people over the course of a year. The City of Santa Cruz area accounted for 1,273 or 39% of the homeless people counted in the Census.[2]
Panhandling is much more predominant in Santa Cruz than elsewhere in the county (15% vs. 3%). We can project that 15% of the people who are homeless in Santa Cruz (191 people at a given point in time, or potentially up to 495 people annually) rely on panhandling as a source of income.
The report also shows that people who are vehicularly housed tend to rely on panhandling more than other groups of homeless people. The survey indicated that 15.6% of vehicularly housed people get their daily living money from Panhandling (which projects out to 153 of the 982 vehicularly housed people that were counted in the homeless Census).[3]
The Report was made up of two very different tools, a direct count called the Census and a series of over 60 questions referred to as the Survey. From the two report tools, were able to project from the survey questions the characteristics of the 3,293 people counted in the census.
The Census (not to be confused with the US Census) was designed to count the number of homeless people in Santa Cruz County. The Census counted 3,293 people in Transitional shelters (1,068) 32%, Vehicularly housed (982) 30%, living on the street (626) 19%, in emergency shelters (324) 10% and miscellaneous (293) 8% including motels, jail, Dominican hospital, rehab programs, etc. See page 6 of the report. [4] The report also annualized the Homeless Census point in time finding with a turnover rate of 2.59 to determine an estimated 8,558 people homeless in Santa Cruz County over the course of a year.[5]
The Survey, asked over 60 questions of 811 people who were homeless. Question 14 on page 93 asks, “Which of the following describes your current living situation?”. The 807 responses are as follows: Staying in a shelter (217) 26%, Staying with friends/family (158) 19.6%, Outdoors (138) 17.1%, Living in transitional housing (100) 12.4%, Have own place (77) 9.5%, automobile/van (63) 7.8%. [6]
It is significant that the Census counted (982) or 30% of homeless people who are vehicularly housed. However, only (63) 7.8% of those participating in the Survey were vehicularly housed. In attempting to determine why so many vehicularly housed people did not participate in the Survey we reviewed the vehicularly housed cross tabulation. A number of findings give us a
clue as to the reasons. Although fewer vehicularly housed people are likely to have young children those that did (under age 2 (10%) and between age 2 and 4 (14%) none used county services such as TANF, Healthy Families, JTPA, or programs through Pioneer house and Community Housing, Vocational Rehabilitation, or an EDD Job Search. [7]
Since the Survey was conducted at points of service to homeless people we concluded that vehicularly housed people seemed to be less likely to take advantage of the many services available to people living in or near poverty in the county.
In conclusion, it is clear that a significant number of people who make use of panhandling as a significant source of income will be affected by the City of Santa Cruz “Downtown Ordinances”. It is essential that a procedure for evaluating the benefits and deficits of the new ordinances be implemented. Such an evaluation should be conducted in as non-political a manner as
possible by professionals with the ability to work with all stakeholders to develop a tool and analysis that will, when complete, be able to answer two significant questions. One; are the new ordinances succeeding in reducing the antisocial behaviors that they were intended to reduce, and two; is unnecessary hardship being created for people that must, of necessity, get their daily
living money from Panhandling.
CAB, Inc. recommends that the City approach a professional survey team such as Applied Survey Research, the scientists behind the Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000 Census and Needs Assessment, to begin the process of designing such a survey tool.
--------------
[1] The United Way, Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000 Census and Needs Assessment, Print Version, Overall Findings, page 103
[2] The United Way, Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000 Census and Needs Assessment, Executive Summary, On Line edition: www.appliedsurveyresearch.org/products/Homeless2000-ExecSumm.pdf, page 4.
[3] Ibid, Vehicularly Housed Profile, On Line edition: www.appliedsurveyresearch.org/products/Homeless2000-Profiles.pdf, page 19.
[4] Ibid, Paper Version, Census Findings, page 26
[5] Ibid, Paper Version, Executive Summary, page 7
[6] Ibid, page 93.
[7] The United Way, Santa Cruz County Homeless 2000 Census and Needs Assessment, Vehicularly Housed Profile, On Line edition: www.appliedsurveyresearch.org/products/Homeless2000-Profiles.pdf, page 7.