San José’s New Homelessness Policy: Help or Harm?

San José’s New Homelessness Policy: Help or Harm?

By: JB Quinnon

Date: April 21, 2025

Introduction

San José, California is considering a controversial policy that would allow police to arrest unhoused individuals who refuse offers of shelter multiple times. Mayor Matt Mahan is leading the charge, framing the plan as a necessary step to ensure both compassion and accountability. The move has sparked sharp debate over whether it represents a practical solution—or an unconstitutional criminalization of poverty.

The Policy Proposal

According to a recent Yahoo News article by Michelle Del Rey, the proposed ordinance would target those who turn down shelter offers three times, with police issuing citations before making arrests. Mahan justifies the approach as a last resort, intended to encourage individuals to accept available housing rather than continue living in public encampments.

The city is simultaneously expanding its temporary housing capacity, including new units from converted motels and modular structures like tiny homes. This effort, according to officials, ensures that shelter space will be available to those who need it—removing a key legal barrier to enforcement.

Legal Backing and National Context

This local initiative aligns with a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling (City of Grants Pass v. Johnson), which gave municipalities more authority to regulate public camping—even in cases where shelter availability is limited. That decision has emboldened other California cities to pursue stricter public encampment enforcement.

Public Reaction

The policy has received mixed responses. A POLITICO/UC Berkeley poll found that 37% of California voters support arresting individuals who refuse shelter, while 38% oppose it. Advocates for the unhoused, including legal and civil rights groups, argue that arrests do nothing to address the root causes of homelessness and may worsen the cycle by adding criminal records and court fines.

On the other hand, some residents and business owners claim that the growing number of encampments has created public health and safety issues that can no longer be ignored.

Criticism and Caution

Critics argue the policy amounts to criminalizing poverty and mental illness. Without comprehensive mental health care, addiction treatment, and permanent housing solutions, they say, enforcement-heavy approaches are at best temporary—and at worst, harmful.

State officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, have publicly distanced themselves from punitive approaches. Newsom has consistently promoted treatment-first strategies and voluntary participation in shelter or rehab programs over criminal penalties.

Conclusion

San José’s proposed policy reflects a broader tension in California and nationwide: how to balance compassion, public safety, and individual rights. Whether this policy becomes a model or a cautionary tale may depend not only on its implementation—but also on whether the city can follow through on promises to provide humane, dignified alternatives to the street.

Sources:

• Michelle Del Rey, Yahoo News, April 21, 2025

• POLITICO / UC Berkeley Poll, April 2025

• City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, Supreme Court Ruling, 2024

• The Independent: “San Jose may start arresting homeless people who refuse shelter”