A new report on homelessness in Colorado released by the Common Sense Institute has come under fire for muddying the waters for lawmakers and other stakeholders working to get people off the streets and back on their feet.

The report claimed an Intervention First model, where people only get housing if they agree to addiction treatment and workforce training, is more effective than the Housing First with Supportive Services approach, which it said has failed to decrease homelessness.

Cathy Alderman, chief communications and public policy officer at the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless, said the report does not even mention rising housing costs.

"When we see housing costs go up, when we see rents increase, we see homelessness increase," Alderman pointed out. "When we don't see more affordable housing being made available to low-income households, we see homelessness increase."

Between 2019 and 2023, Denver's already high rents rose by nearly 30%. Last year, there was a gap of more than 134,000 affordable housing units across the state for workers earning 30% of the median income or less. The Institute defended its report and said by email the public deserves to know whether their tax dollars are helping reduce homelessness, not just reshuffling where people sleep.

According to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition, Housing First reduces homelessness by 88% and improves housing stability by 41% compared with Intervention First programs, which Alderman called a one-size-fits-all approach.

"It said you must participate with those specific services in order to be eligible for housing," Alderman noted. "There are lots of people experiencing homelessness that don't need substance-use treatment, that don't need behavioral health. They need housing."

Housing First programs provide rapid access to housing and care teams connect people to employment opportunities, medical and mental health care and substance use treatment but the services are not required or used as a punitive tool.

Alderman stressed the model works but current investments do not meet the scale of the problem.

"If we had the housing resources and we were providing more housing with supportive services to larger populations of people experiencing homelessness, we would absolutely see a reduction in homelessness," Alderman asserted. "But we've never had the political will to do that."

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