Today I emailed ChicoSol a 13-page investigative story tip about Chico’s housing crisis.

Not just homelessness. HOUSING.

Read the complete investigative submission to ChicoSol (PDF)

ChicoSol is one of my favorite local news sources. That’s why I wanted to bring this research to them. The November 4 Town Hall and the City’s proposed five-year homelessness plan have generated plenty of discussion about encampments, drugs, treatment, and enforcement.

But we’re still not spending nearly enough time asking why people can’t find housing they can afford.

I want the press to investigate the decisions, the money, and the outcomes … not just report on the consequences.

This Is About the SYSTEM … Not a Conspiracy

I’m not claiming that elected officials, police officers, nonprofit workers, and developers conspired to create homelessness.

I’m asking whether decades of decisions and funding incentives have produced a system that repeatedly follows this pattern:

1. Too little housing gets built for people with low incomes.
2. More people become housing insecure.
3. Public discussion focuses on drugs, crime, disorder, and visible encampments instead of the housing shortage.
4. Public anger generates support for enforcement and restrictive shelter policies.
5. Money flows into facilities, service administration, policing, contracts, and temporary responses.
6. Success is measured by activity and people served while permanent housing remains out of reach.

And the cycle starts again.

Whether that pattern was intentional or emerged over time doesn’t change the question: Is the system actually ending homelessness?

What I Asked ChicoSol to Investigate

Decades of Housing Decisions

Chico recorded only 17.6% of its low-income RHNA allocation in the 2007–2014 planning cycle and 30.2% in 2014–2022, while exceeding 200% of its above-moderate-income allocation in the latter cycle.

When did Chico last meet its low-income housing target across a complete planning cycle? Why did we stop pursuing inclusionary zoning in 2022? What replaced the affordable-housing funds lost when California ended redevelopment agencies? And what can we learn from other communities with different housing outcomes?

These are questions about the City’s policies and results … not accusations against everyone who has served on the Council.

The Nearly $50,000 Report We Already Paid For

In 2021, the City authorized a $49,950 Hope Street Coalition contract. Its February 2022 strategic plan called for better accounting of homelessness-related City spending, including annual cost reporting and specific quarterly performance measures.

Were those recommendations implemented? If so, where are the reports? If not, WHY NOT?

Before we approve another plan, shouldn’t we know what happened to the last one?

Follow the Money … ALL of It

The submission asks journalists to examine the Jesus Center/Renewal Center financing, Genesis Pallet Shelter operations, Torres Community Shelter, shelter contracts, and the costs of policing, cleanup, temporary fencing, site preparation, dirt hauling, and other subcontracted work.

Who owns and finances the facilities? Who receives public payments, rent, fees, and contract revenue? How were contracts awarded? What actual permanent-housing results followed?

The City’s draft cites about $3.49 million in Genesis costs for fiscal year 2024–25. We should have clear, comparable reporting on permanent housing placements, housing retention, and the cost per sustained outcome … not just numbers of beds filled or people contacted.

The CalAIM and Insurance Connection

This is another funding source that deserves investigation.

Under California’s CalAIM program, eligible Medi-Cal services may include Enhanced Care Management, housing navigation, tenancy support, and certain recovery services. Ordinary shelter stays are not automatically billable to insurance.

But True North Housing Alliance, which operates Torres Shelter, described expected increases in billing health insurers for CalAIM services in its City funding application. The Jesus Center has also advertised for a CalAIM medical-billing position.

How much is billed and paid? How do the payments relate to other public funding? And most importantly, how many people actually obtain and keep housing?

Care should help someone reach housing … not become a substitute for housing.

Enforcement, Treatment, and the People Making Decisions

I asked for an examination of Chico PD’s enforcement costs, the City’s restrictions affecting harm-reduction services, changes in local mental-health programs, and new investments in treatment facilities.

The submission also identifies public records concerning relationships among City leaders, police advisory groups, nonprofit fundraising efforts, political contributors, and regional officials.

Those are investigative leads, not evidence of a secret conspiracy or wrongdoing. The relationships should be checked against actual contracts, public votes, disclosures, and decisions … with everyone involved given an opportunity to respond.

People experiencing homelessness deserve treatment and medical care when they need it. Housing should not require forced treatment or sobriety.

Bring in Independent Expertise

Barbara Poppe is first on my list. I organized a conversation with her in October and have formally requested an independent assessment of Chico’s homelessness response by Barbara Poppe and Associates.

The submission also asks the paper to examine the work of Iain De Jong and OrgCode, Dr. Jill Wiwcharuk (Street Doctor Jill), Mark Horvath and Invisible People, and housing researchers Gregg Colburn and Clayton Page Aldern.

It includes the October 19, 2026 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analysis of how proposed HUD funding changes could undermine effective housing assistance and encourage more restrictive responses.

Why aren’t we making far better use of independent research and qualified outside expertise?

We Need More Options … and Real Housing Outcomes

I’ve called for more opportunities for organizations like North State Shelter Team, CHAT, Safe Space, and other community partners. I’ve proposed a permanent City Commission on Housing and Homelessness and meaningful participation by people who have experienced homelessness.

We need interim places where people can safely stay while permanent affordable housing is developed. We need voluntary services that respect individual needs. And we need to know what results our spending actually achieves.

I experienced homelessness in Chico for more than ten years. I know people who have been helped by shelters, and I know people who still can’t find a home after receiving every kind of referral and service.

More assessments don’t create a home. More enforcement doesn’t create a home. A shelter placement is not the same thing as permanent housing.

I sent this submission because I want the questions investigated, the records made public, and the entire community involved … including people who disagree with me.

I’m willing to work with anyone who wants a better Chico for ALL Chicoans.

HOUSING IS THE ISSUE … HOMELESSNESS IS THE OUTCOME.

Read or share the full ChicoSol investigative submission (PDF)

Scotty Franzyshen