California’s battle against homelessness needs a ‘combined arms’ approach

World War II was the most massive military conflict in recorded history and one that redefined effective military strategy, moving away from the static set-piece battles of previous wars and toward mechanization, speed and, most importantly, “combined arms.”

As military strategist William S. Lind has written, “Combined arms hits the enemy with two or more arms simultaneously in such a manner that the actions he must take to defend himself from one make him more vulnerable to another.”

Nazi Germany was an early adopter, allowing it to quickly sweep through Western Europe during the early months of the war. Despite having the world’s largest army at the time, France was committed to static defenses rather than rigorous offense and fell in just a few weeks.

Germany’s lesson was not lost on its foes, particularly Great Britain and the U.S. The allies’ adoption of combined arms led to victory in Europe and the Pacific War against Japan.

This bit of military history is offered because California is losing its war on homelessness, largely because state and local governments are operating in political silos rather than combining their resources effectively.

The state, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, has been providing funds for local efforts — about $1 billion a year — but Newsom complains incessantly that local governments aren’t spending the money effectively.

In turn, the locals complain that the state has given them only year-by-year allocations, making it impossible to create long-term programs to get homeless people off the streets and into housing and programs to alleviate their underlying issues.

However, local unity on seeking long-term financing breaks up when county and city officials bicker over who’s accountable for results. Homelessness is most visible in cities but counties operate health and social services programs.

The local infighting was so bad in Los Angeles County, which has nearly 10 million residents, that a joint city-county homelessness agency, criticized for a lack of transparency and progress, was abandoned.

The squabbling over money and accountability seems to be increasing as homelessness and the public’s concern grow.

After months of complaining about local inaction and threatening penalties for failure, Newsom omitted the local allocation from the revised 2025-26 budget he unveiled in May, drawing a new chorus of complaints from local officials.

This week, in its version of the budget, legislative leaders also shunned a new allocation of funds but instead included weasel words of intention to give the locals $500 million — half the usual amount — sometime next year.

Not surprisingly, the California State Association of Counties immediately complained about the Legislature’s mealy-mouthed approach, as did the organization representing the state’s largest cities. The mayors of three Bay Area cities — San Francisco, San Jose and Oakland — weighed in as well.

“If the state wants to call homelessness a crisis, they need to treat it like one,” the mayors said in a public statement. “Cities like ours have been asked to lead — and we are. But here’s the truth: we cannot solve a statewide crisis if the state won’t show up.

“We’ve heard again and again that Sacramento doesn’t want to fund failure. Our answer: don’t abandon success.”

The counties’ criticism of the state budget’s semi-abandonment of local homelessness financing includes a suggestion that California adopt a combined arms approach in which the roles of the state, counties and cities are carefully delineated to reduce confusion over accountability and maximize effectiveness.

Unless something like that is adopted, homelessness will continue to confound and anger California’s voters while officials, from the governor down, merely point fingers of blame at each other.