Skid Row Retains a Vital Mission

The Community Redevelopment Agency, together with the Urban Land Institute, is currently assessing the possibility of dispersing the population of Los Angeles’ Skid Row to elsewhere in the city and county. This move is backed by downtown commercial interests, which see the future of Skid Row as a business center and not as a refuge for down-and-outs.

In contrast, Mayor Tom Bradley is hold-ing the line on the demolition of Skid Row hotels, for the time being at least. This would have the effect of preserving Skid Row as a haven for the poor and homeless.

In judging these alternative policies, it must be understood that without Skid Row most of Los Angeles’ homeless would be much worse off. Without it they would be more isolated, have fewer resoures and fewer friends, be less healthy in mind and body, less well-clothed and fed and even less-sheltered than today. Why is this?

Skid Row acts as a “safety net” for street people. It is a complex network of support systems--family, friends, health and welfare services, jobs and recreation. Skid Row is a community . It may not look like our traditional notion of a community, but this does not diminish its significance. The net-works of Skid Row are positive features, helping the disadvantaged to cope with their (often temporary) difficulties. In this way downtown Los Angeles is a “coping mechanism” of major significance in the everyday lives of street people.

This point was clearly demonstrated in a report this year prepared by USC’s School of Urban & Regional Planning. The report examined the work of Los Angeles’ Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing Corp. in renovating Skid Row hotels and providing other neighborhood services, like the new vest-pocket park at 5th and San Julian streets. The USC study showed how important the hotels, parks and other elements of the Skid Row safety net are to the home-less. For example, those fortunate enough to live in an SRO-run hotel seem to manage much better than those who do not, and make much less use of formal support services (like health care). For those without shelter, the park at 5th & San Julian provides a vital link in their strategy for survival on the street. The park provides a place of safety, rest and human contact.

SRO Housing Corp. is one of many agencies operating on the Row. Food and clothing services exist nearby. A women’s shelter has recently opened, and a new mission is under construction near the park. These actions are extending the social safety net. It would be foolish to now destroy other aspects of that net, like the SRO hotels. There are precious few places outside Skid Row where such safety nets exist.

What does all this mean for Bradley vs. the Community Redevelopment Agency?

The Bradley policy of preserving Skid Row as a major housing resource is correct. In the absence of alternative housing, the continued demolition of SRO hotels would simply dump thousands more onto the streets.

The CRA proposal to disperse the Skid Row population is a recipe for disaster. There is no way that the homeless will cope with their problems if they are scattered throughout the region--isolated from the very support networks that help them overcome their difficulties.

The CRA proposal could make sense in the longer term if the dispersal policy was linked to the deliberate creation of support networks in other communities. Why not try to replicate the good qualities of Skid Row elsewhere in our cities? Suitable support networks could be created in every community in the region where there are housing, transportation and rudimentary service opportunities.

Dispersal is acceptable if it means decentralizing the needy to other centers in which support centers exist or can be constructed. Dispersal is suicidal if we scatter the homeless to the wind without help. While we make up our minds about this, let’s be sure to preserve on Skid Row the support services that stand between the poor and oblivion.