Is There Really NOT ENOUGH in the Lakes Region? | For the Houseless?
Is There Really NOT ENOUGH? | And … Is the Another Way to Address “Houselessness”?
A good friend recently suggested to me that I was not clear where I stood on “houselessness” in the Lakes Region. Admittedly he was correct, as I’d had faced an internal struggle with the dilemma of balancing the fiscal costs of solving this escalating challenge … amid the consistent cries from some that “we don’t have ENOUGH: money, land, buildings, staff, volunteers, and time to resolve this crisis.
Readers may understandably ask: If what we are currently doing to address “houslessness” is working … why do we need another way? One Perspective: Because what we are doing is not working well.
Folks addressing houselessness increasing exponentially across America disagree on causes, disagree on solutions, and disagree on why programs have failed. And some assert that programs that have failed are actually working and just require more public grant money or private investment.
So well meaning folks enter meetings every day across America to address houselessness … as a vocation or as volunteers. Most, if not all, bring with them into the houslessness and housings meetings … “internal conflicts” they have about causes, solutions, and efficacy of existing programs.
I use “Worldview” here in this graphic in the context of boardrooms, corporate and government meetings, faith-based meetings; in which many readers have attended or even hosted. Those are the inevitable meetings WE MAY DREAD where resources to solve a challenge are declared “NOT ENOUGH”; and, we are told expenses, and human resources MUST BE SLASHED. Further, those are the meetings where participants enter the room in a state of mind of “self-protecting” (ie., justification “CYAs”) and perhaps “self-promotion” in order to lobby in favor of say: more grant money, more private investment, more human resources … as being required to address and solve a challenges … such as “houslessness”; or a gap between stagnant wages and rising rent, rising medical costs, rising energy costs.
In previous posts, I have referenced Jamie Winship and his organization Identity Exchange as being both a mentor and an individual with a wide audience in the realm of presenting to small groups nationwide the concept of two Worldviews: one which is called a “Separation Worldview” in which NOT ENOUGH is a main theme perspective; versus one called a “Connected Worldview” where “there is ENOUGH” is presented as a premise; that is a foundational “First Principle” for addressing a challenge such as houselessness. Jamie’s bio and work with a wide range of small groups in presentations to governmental representatives, first responders, special forces, educators, corporate leaders, and faith-based organizations can be quickly viewed HERE.
The following video at the Identity Exchange YouTube channel addresses these two Worldviews in the context presented in this Blog Post.
So the Separation Worldview the is “Not ENOUGH” to fix HOUSELESSNESS, so many municipal jurisdictions have defaulted to “self-protection” mode with policies to:: Make houselessness a criminal offense by:
removing them from sight in parks, on benches and on streets;
taxing the houseless;
fining the houseless;
incarcerating the houseless;
destroying encampments of the houseless
Threats continue to emerge and evolve, especially policies which seek to impose unfunded mandates, strip communities of local control, and punish an overworked and understaffed services workforce. For example:
1. Several states are considering legislation to create “Homeless Drug Free Zones” to create criminal penalties for both providers and persons when we know the dangers of permanent punishments in creating barriers to solving homelessness.
2. Several states have enabled individuals to sue localities over encampments, creating financial burdens on already cash-strapped communities and forcing more cities to enact harsh and counter-productive camping bans.
3. The National Homelessness Law Center estimates that at least 150 communities in the wake of the Grants Pass decision have adopted camping bans or new ordinances which seek to cite, fine, arrest, and jail people for experiencing unsheltered homelessness.
Despite the long-standing yet rapidly evolving attempts to criminalize homelessness across the country, a recent Alliance analysis of nearly 100 reports on the subject reinforces the fact that these laws do not reduce homelessness. Instead, they worsen the crisis by increasing arrests, creating barriers to housing and services, and causing lasting harm to the people they target.
CLICK LINK: https://youtu.be/S93r_p-9DXI?feature=shared
See also Legal Advocacy Group: National Homeless Law Center
Medford Oregon (Sam Engel, Ex. Dir. — Rogue Retreat) adjacent Grants Pass success with houseless camps (17 mins. into documentary video). It can be done. “…
Rogue Retreat is known for its creative housing programs, including tiny house villages, low barrier shelters, and campgrounds. However, Rogue Retreat does not “warehouse” homeless people. Rogue Retreat provides supportive services that help our program participants reach their highest potential. …”
For more information, please visit the Alliance’s Criminalization Resources Landing page.
In summer 2024, the Supreme Court’s ruling in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson[1] emboldened communities across the country to consider or enact new measures that make sleeping in public spaces a legally punishable offense, effectively criminalizing homelessness.
However, criminalization only exacerbates the crisis, failing to address the root causes of homelessness and punishing individuals for circumstances beyond their control. This approach is not only harmful and counterproductive, but also deepens existing racial inequities, given the disproportionate impact of homelessness on Black people and other communities of color.
CLICK LINK: https://youtu.be/bNDeQf23g34?feature=shared
Leading up to the case, 57 social scientists who have previously published peer-reviewed research on homelessness came together to submit an amicus curiae brief [55 pages: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf ] against criminalization.
This brief serves as an introduction to a comprehensive series that distills their extensive research, which highlights how criminalizing homelessness not only prolongs the issue but also squanders public resources and causes severe harm to individuals’ health and well-being.
[1] City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, 603 U.S. ___ (2024) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/603/23-175/
This policy regarding Encampments recently made the news in Concord reported by News 603 on August 12, 2026.
People in New Hampshire and in the Lakes Region are all beginning to actually SEE the “houseless” on streets, camped in parks, and pushing grocery carts with their belongings from one place to another.
Numerous studies reported by the National Alliance to End Homelessness demonstrate Houselessness is Increasing Exponentially. But what does this mean to a person living in the Lakes Region? See insightful sharable GRAPHICS at this LINK.
What does it mean? Perhaps consider this Lily Pond Example, which this writer was first introduced to as an environmental sciences student by professor Donella ”Dana” Meadows at Dartmouth College after her book “Limits to Growth” was published.
On exponential growth explained to colleagues, one researcher writes: “Recently, I wanted to introduce the concept of exponential thinking to my extended team. We’re investing in activities that may not pay off in the short term but are backed by inevitable trends. As a result, it can be frustrating, or even demotivating, if you are expecting traditional linear results.
Rather than trying to explain exponential as a mathematical function, I told the following story:
Imagine a large pond that is completely empty except for 1 lily pad. The lily pad will grow exponentially and cover the entire pond in 3 years. In other words, after 1 month there will 2 lily pads, after 2 months there will be 4, etc. The pond is covered in 36 months.
If I asked you when the pond would be half filled with lily pads, the temptation would be to say 18 months – half of the 36 months. In fact, the correct answer is 35 months. Right before the pond is filled, it’s half filled; because it doubles the next month.
While the correct answer is relatively straightforward to understand, the brain doesn’t work well exponentially. We think linearly.
So when we look at this example carefully in the Lakes Region regarding houselessness, we analogize it to lilies expanding exponentially on a pond in late summer to a point where we become alarmed … that is; where the pond is 1/2 choked off at the surface … So then how many days do we have to correct this “exponential” population increase? Answer: ONE DAY!
Applying this again by analogy to our now common observations of houslessness in our Lakes Region communities, this revelation may now give readers some pause to contemplate the ramifications. This is particularly significant where two other “Connected” factors are examined (both of which are increasing exponentially and not linearly):
1 - the gap between real income and housing affordability; and
2 - the amount of available housing in the Lakes Region flatlining; in the wake of houslessness increasing exponentially.
Please consider this Practical and Recent Example of Addressing Houselessness and Mental Illness in the Lakes Region with Important Predictions of “NOT ENOUGH” funding for our Communities:
The following reporting is from an article on this highly newsworthy topic in The Laconia Sun in April 2025 about The Bay Street Apartment project:
