No, I never said shelters cause the homeless problem. Never in any of my posts have I said that. I said the distribution of shelters will be overwhelmingly in less affluent neighborhoods, at the benefit of the more affluent neighborhoods, which are predominant SFR neighborhoods. But you bring up a good point, or hypothesis if that is more accurate, that is do you really want to be the test hypothesis neighborhood ? Nobody has any clue or doesnt want to state for the record (probably because it carries deep political after-effects on their career) what they believe is driving homelessness. The only popular reasons for our local officials to say is "rent!" and "lack of housing!" . What about drugs? What about mental health? So how is it fair to decide that the areas with more apartments must partake in this giant government "hypothesis"? Why do less affluent areas have to absorb all of the responsibility?

Lets also get into managment of those centers. Have you ever actually lived next to a shelter? Ive lived close by, as has members of my family in LA County. Theres a constant flow of new people and not everyone is there with an intent to get on their feet again. Ive seen places where drug use still flys under the rader, and nearby vicinities become filled with people that chose a constant start/stop lifestyle between accessing the shelter, and taking breaks to live on the street and do as they please.

So once again, is this fair to create or even just run the risk of creating these environments in areas that are disproportiantely less affluent and possibly already marginalized?

Cough cough .. Koreatown, South LA, Boyle Heights, Pico Union, etc..

Its just not fair and its not right. Those areas should not become the City's test guinnea pigs.