There’s only one statewide measure on the California ballot this primary election — Proposition 1. Deemed “Treatment not Tents” by its supporters, Prop 1 aims to tackle homelessness and mental illness in tandem.
A “yes” vote means supporting a $6.4 billion bond to expand California’s mental health and substance abuse treatment infrastructure. A lot of that money would go toward permanent supportive housing for unhoused residents dealing with mental illness. But Prop 1 would also require counties to reroute some of their existing mental health funds toward housing.
For Santa Cruz Mayor Fred Keeley, that’s fine. In his view, any legislation that funnels money toward housing and reducing homelessness is a good thing.
“From my point of view as a mayor of a city, Proposition 1 is going to provide some funding to help address that issue which has been sorely underfunded and unaddressed for a long time,” Keeley said.
For Katy Eckert, Director of Behavioral Health for Monterey County, the measure is more complicated. Prop 1 doesn’t introduce new funding for housing or mental health treatment infrastructure, it redistributes existing funding. Because of that, Eckert worries Prop 1 will result in funding cuts for Monterey County’s mental health services, especially “upstream” programs that focus on prevention and early intervention.
“There will be pain experienced by our community by the associated reductions in services that people are accustomed to having be there,” Eckert said.
Eckert understands there’s a dire need for more housing and other services for unhoused individuals in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties. But she doesn’t think Prop 1 is the best way to address the problem.
“My fear is that the supports that we provide to people who are currently housed but need our supports to stay safely housed, those will be restricted,” she said. “And my fear is that there will actually be more people who end up homeless, because we will not be able to wrap the same levels of supports around them.”
At the heart of the Prop 1 debate is a question of prioritization. Many Californians agree that there’s a need for more robust mental health services as well as more permanent supportive housing and mental health treatment infrastructure. In a way, Prop 1 is asking voters to decide which of those is more important.
Eckert wants to see more housing built, but not at the expense of existing mental health programs. Keeley, on the other hand, has one clear priority — decreasing homelessness.
“We've got an opportunity to do something positive and take a step that has not been there before,” Keeley said. “...This is a very good opportunity to continue the progress we've already made in the City of Santa Cruz and directly assist a population that has enormous challenges.”
Ultimately, if county mental health funds are used for housing, there’s less available for prevention programs. At the end of the day, the question for voters is: what’s your priority?
