Affordable housing is the problem … homelessness is the outcome.

I recently read an eight-page document by Rob Berry of the Chico Restoration Project titled How Chico Governs Its Future, published October 25, 2026.

After reading it, reviewing his arguments, and considering where I agree and disagree, I decided to put together a response of my own.

Not to start another political argument. Not to attack Rob or his opinions. And certainly not because I believe I have all the answers.

I want to have a conversation about how Chico makes decisions, what those decisions accomplish, and whether we’re actually addressing the problems facing our community.

I believe there is common ground here … but also some fundamental differences in how we approach homelessness, affordable housing, treatment, and enforcement.

I encourage everyone to read BOTH documents before drawing conclusions.

The two documents

1. Rob Berry … How Chico Governs Its Future
Chico Restoration Project | October 25, 2026 | 8 pages

Read Rob Berry’s original document (PDF)

2. Scotty Franzyshen … How Chico Can Govern Toward Housing
A Common-Ground Response | October 30, 2026 | 5 pages

Read my response (PDF)

Both documents deserve consideration. I encourage readers to examine the arguments and supporting evidence for themselves.

Where I find common ground

Rob’s document asks some important questions about how Chico governs itself.

Are we making decisions based on facts and measurable outcomes? Are we holding public officials and contracted organizations accountable? Are we evaluating the long-term consequences of our decisions? And are we willing to change direction when the evidence tells us something isn’t working?

On those questions … I agree!

We should be questioning how public money is spent. We should demand transparency, accountability, and measurable results.

A program shouldn’t be considered successful simply because it exists, receives funding, or satisfies somebody’s political philosophy.

And moving people experiencing homelessness from one location to another does not necessarily mean we’ve solved anything.

Rob acknowledges that displacement can move costs elsewhere and that enforcement alone cannot create economic independence.

Those are important acknowledgments.

Where we begin to differ is in what we identify as the underlying problem and what we believe government should do about it.

Where our approaches differ

My position starts with something I believe Chico has failed to adequately address for far too long …

The shortage of affordable housing is a central reason people are experiencing homelessness.

Of course, addiction, mental illness, disability, family circumstances, and personal decisions can complicate someone’s situation.

But none of those things creates an affordable home where one doesn’t exist.

The 2025 Butte County Point-in-Time survey identified housing availability and the cost of rent and deposits as significant barriers among respondents.

We need to examine those realities rather than continue treating homelessness primarily as a behavioral problem.

My approach is grounded in several principles that I am unwilling to compromise.

Housing First over Treatment First

Provide people with a safe, stable place to live, then offer the professional assistance and services they may need.

Treatment for addiction and mental health conditions should be available, accessible, and voluntary. It should not be a prerequisite for receiving basic shelter or housing.

Dignity and respect

Everyone deserves a safe, clean place to sleep … NO EXCEPTIONS!

People should not be required to prove their worthiness, sobriety, or willingness to comply with someone else’s expectations before receiving basic assistance.

Enforcement for actual crime … not homelessness

Violence, theft, threats, exploitation, and other genuine crimes deserve appropriate law enforcement attention.

But experiencing homelessness should not, by itself, make someone a criminal.

We also need to address sanitation, public access, environmental damage, and neighborhood concerns. Those issues matter. But repeatedly moving people without providing realistic alternatives doesn’t solve the underlying housing shortage.

Facts over fiction or personal belief

Our decisions should be based on credible research, proven methods, and measurable outcomes … not ideology, political affiliation, assumptions, or personal judgments about people experiencing homelessness.

That standard applies to my proposals just as much as it applies to anyone else’s.

We also need to talk about the money

This is another area where I believe Rob and I share common ground.

Chico is spending millions of dollars annually on managing homelessness.

For fiscal year 2024–25, the City reported approximately $3.49 million in operating expenditures for the Genesis Pallet Shelter alone.

That isn’t evidence that an organization is pocketing the money as profit. But it certainly raises legitimate questions about what we’re purchasing, how effectively those services are being delivered, and what outcomes we’re achieving.

How many people are moving into permanent housing? How many remain housed? What does each successful outcome cost?

And what are we spending on enforcement, cleanup, displacement, and repeatedly responding to the same conditions?

It’s time we got serious about HOW and WHERE we spend our money.

I would like to see Chico investigate alternatives, including a resident-governed Genesis Pallet Shelter supported by community organizations and qualified professionals.

Why couldn’t the people living there have a greater role in governing their own community?

Why couldn’t we explore a model that emphasizes independence, responsibility, dignity, and community participation instead of relying so heavily on outside management?

I’m not claiming it would be free or without challenges. I’m suggesting it deserves serious investigation and an honest cost comparison.

I would also like Chico to establish a commission dedicated to housing and homelessness, bringing together people with lived experience, housing professionals, qualified service providers, and other community members.

What I hope comes from this conversation

I am not suggesting we ignore public safety, eliminate accountability, abandon treatment services, or disregard legitimate community concerns.

Quite the opposite.

I’m asking that we examine the evidence and use the methods that have demonstrated results.

I want us to measure success by how many people can find, afford, and KEEP a home … not simply by how many campsites have been cleared, citations issued, or referrals made.

I also want us to distinguish temporary shelter from permanent housing. We need safe interim options today while we work toward solving the long-term affordable housing shortage.

Housing supply matters … but so does affordability!

And I want the people most directly affected by these policies to have a meaningful voice in creating them.

An invitation to respond … constructively

This is where I’d really like to hear from everyone, including Rob Berry himself.

I’ve presented his document alongside my response because I believe people should have the opportunity to consider both perspectives.

You do not have to agree with me.

In fact, I welcome disagreement. I welcome corrections. I welcome additional research and information that might challenge my conclusions.

But I’m asking everyone who wishes to participate to make this a constructive conversation.

If you disagree with something, tell us what and why.

If you believe the research is wrong, share the evidence.

If you believe an approach won’t work, explain why and offer an alternative.

If you believe Chico should be doing something differently, tell us what that looks like, what it would cost, and how we would measure its success.

Simply criticizing someone, questioning their motives, assigning political labels, or declaring that an idea is wrong without offering anything substantive doesn’t move the conversation forward.

Criticism is welcome … but let’s make it constructive.

And that expectation applies equally to me.

I am willing to reconsider my assumptions when presented with credible evidence. I ask the same of anyone joining this discussion.

We don’t need to agree about everything to find common ground. But we do need to be willing to listen, learn, and respect one another.

We have spent enough time arguing about the people experiencing homelessness in our community.

Maybe it’s time we spent more time discussing the conditions responsible for their homelessness … and what we can actually do to change them.

Affordable housing is the problem … homelessness is the outcome.

A conversation, not an argument.

Scotty Franzyshen
Community Support Specialist
Building • Fixing • Serving