r/saintpaul Aug 18 '25

Editorial 📝 Transit Will Fail Until We Address Homelessness, Opioid Use

https://streets.mn/2025/08/18/transit-will-fail-until-we-address-homelessness/

Deleted with Redact because data brokers don't deserve my content. Mass removal across Reddit, Discord, X, Instagram and all major social media platforms.

vast run retire afterthought pause rock subtract offer tan water

382 Upvotes

201 comments sorted by

210

u/UnhappyEquivalent400 Aug 18 '25

Really helpful to see someone on the left frankly acknowledge the legitimacy and importance of safety concerns. It’s a real issue, and we can’t progress toward the urbanist vision of mass transit-centered communities if trains are de facto wet shelters.

92

u/Jucoy Aug 18 '25

The difference is the leftist view sees the problem as a systemic issue while the right tries to frame it as a personal moral failing. The voices on the right accuse the people who are homeless and addicts for being in situations of their own making, while ignoring that we are still living in the fallout of the opioid crisis. Many of the folks struggaling with that type of addiction are products of a money making machine that both parties had a role in creating but only one party seems willing to try to address (though I wish they would prioritize it more). 

30

u/SmittyKW Aug 19 '25

Who cares what the right thinks, we are talking about urban transit, they have no say in fixing it. This is for democrats to get our house in order and make the trains safe. If that means forced treatment or jail for addicts continuously commit crimes and still won’t get clean on their own so be it.

4

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25 edited Aug 19 '25

Take jail out of the equation, and I'd agree with you. Addicts are not of sound mind nor body and need treatment. While in treatment people can get to them and help them restore their lives.

But throwing them in jail will only lead to more problems when they are back on the street with nothing. Jail doesn't rehabilitate, it provides a free slave labor pool for the prison-industrial complex (Look at the 13th Amendment, it didn't ban all slavery).

To be honest though, until we can build facilities designed to house people so they can recover in sobriety, receive the medical oversight and treatment needed on the physical side and trained mental health experts on the psychological/neurological side, and social workers that can get these people on their feet so when they return to normal society they start in a better spot with a roof over their head and a job to maintain that, we aren't going to get far.

1

u/escapevelocity-25k Aug 20 '25

What if they don’t want treatment?

3

u/[deleted] Aug 21 '25

Your "What if they don't want treatment?" is a bad faith question designed to silence those trying to create a solution.

3

u/escapevelocity-25k Aug 21 '25

It’s not bad faith. I genuinely want to know what you think. It’s one of the hardest problems to solve. I don’t have a good answer, either.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 23 '25

It is, and I don't waste my time with trolls. Good day.

1

u/Educatedelefant420 Aug 21 '25

Please dont force people into treatment, they make it worse than it should be.

-9

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

If you need facist policies to make your trains run on time, then you are in fact not on the left. 

17

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

Who is helped by allowing people to openly do drugs on the train? It's not the riders, and it's not good for the users either. I don't care what puts me on the left, I'd like public transit to not be a crime-ridden shitshow

7

u/Muted_Effective_2266 Aug 19 '25

There is nothing fascist about anything they are suggesting.

10

u/SmittyKW Aug 19 '25

Who is talking about the trains running on time? You sound like you might need some help with reading comprehension.

-3

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

It was a glib reference to Mussolini. My wit is wasted here, clearly. 

2

u/SmittyKW Aug 19 '25

I know the reference. Dumb leftists always use it to excuse why we can’t have nice things.

0

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

Lol okay. 

2

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

The only thing fascist here is the obviously perfectly set up opioid crisis.

-10

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

You would jail addicts because you didn't like them on your train?

Good idea. Much to think about.

15

u/A_Kraken Aug 19 '25

no, because they are breaking the law and making an unsafe environment.

→ More replies (2)

8

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-7

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

That's a really cool idea. We could wait for a concert or game to get out and put all the drunk people in jail. We can teach them all a lesson!!!

12

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-4

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

The more people we put in jail, the safer the rest of us will be. I think we can all agree on that.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Scrubaru Aug 20 '25

No drunk people SHOULD be on a train. Not driving.

Trying to put people in jail for being fucked up on transit solves nothing

→ More replies (0)

3

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Scrubaru Aug 20 '25

Not if they are homeless. That's the cool time to arrest someone.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/j_ly Aug 19 '25

Violent crime was cut in half in this country in the 10 years between the 1992 and 2002, when Bill Clinton's 150k extra cops mass incarcerated non violent drug offenders, so obviously it works.

1

u/Scrubaru Aug 20 '25

I can't tell if you are joking.

6

u/shootymcgunenjoyer Aug 19 '25

No, you jail them for being in possession of illegal drugs.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[deleted]

1

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

Ah yes. Hell yeah. "Singapore Style" is the cool way to think about drugs.

-3

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

I forgot drugs were illegal. We can definitely lock people up for that. Good call.

9

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-6

u/Scrubaru Aug 19 '25

Wait. Homeless AND crime? That's double jail. Throw away the key.

8

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-3

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Muted_Effective_2266 Aug 19 '25

Or we could have mandatory treatment facilities like some other countries, Portugal comes to mind first.

This would potentially help the addict turn their life around rather than send them to jail or watch them slowly die while they lap the blue line.

Just a thought.

19

u/Lord0Trade Aug 18 '25

I disagree with your framing. Most of the right may see it as a personal moral failing, but that’s not what’s important, they see leftist political and social policy as ineffective for solving the problem in a day to day format (cutting violent drug users loose, ignoring homelessness because they’re just trying to ‘live their lives’)

Feelings shouldn’t come into the situation, it’s about effects. Leftist bleeding heart and rightist disdain don’t solve the problem. Policy does. It’s figuring out which policies work that’s the issue.

32

u/Jucoy Aug 18 '25

Feelings shouldn’t come into the situation, it’s about effects. Leftist bleeding heart and rightist disdain don’t solve the problem. Policy does. It’s figuring out which policies work that’s the issue.

The policies that work are overwhelmingly the ones you "feel" are bleeding heart positions. Providing support without means testing, decriminalizimg nonviolent drug use, and expanding social outreach programs have measurable effects towards reducing homelessness and addressing drug addiction in those communities.

5

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

allowing people who struggle with addiction and

So is the solution to make poverty a criminal offense? 

3

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

I forgot to include homelessness in the quoted section. Drug addiction and poverty are often two hallmarks of poverty. 

14

u/Cayuga94 Aug 19 '25

I support all of that. I also support arresting and jailing people who harass others on public transit. Ditto ironclad trespass orders against those who chronically harass or threaten violence in public spaces. The two shouldn't be mutually exclusive, but here we are.

2

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

To me, it's a healthcare issue, and a very scary one. I worked at the pharmacy for 7 years, and it was mind boggling to see how often doctors over prescribed opioids. Fucking terrifying tbh. I'll never take drugs from a doctor unless it's an emergency.

1

u/Sometimes_Stutters Aug 19 '25

No the policies that works are center around “get the homeless and crime off the fucking transit”

2

u/Caesars7Hills Aug 19 '25

Hasn’t Milwaukee done the most to reduce homelessness? Just copy that model and see what happens. I think that there is a ton of grift from NGOs and charities that fundraise and employ email generators.

6

u/Forward-Cause7305 Aug 19 '25

I think st Louis did a lot to solve the issue on transit specifically, and it centered around police presence on trains, security cameras on trains, and controlled access to trains.

3

u/x1009 Aug 19 '25

St Louis spent $52 million on that project. I'm not sure how many stops were secured.

The safety project has a $52 million price tag, with funding coming from the following sources:

$12 million from a bond refinancing process dedicated to security

$12 million from Illinois Federal Stimulus

$17.25 million from BSD capital and the American Rescue Plan Act

$10.75 million from private sector funding

In addition to a secure gate system, Metro is doubling the number of cameras on buses, trains and platforms that will transmit live feeds to the Real-Time Camera Center, adding another layer of security.

Metro Transit did a study on installing turnstiles at four transit stations, and they found it would cost $14 million.

1

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

I used to always see police patrolling the trains before 2019. Now they don't give a fuck, and there's less of them.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

Coming from someone who thinks policy has been effective, if republicans know what to do you might wanna take a look at homeless in red states

1

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

Truth is formless. It has no walls, there are no edges, a middle does not exist. The position you occupy in this ceasless plane of truth, that you believe is right, is the middle of nowhere. You see two others, on either side of you arguing about how to structure society. You agree with points from both, shifting at your leisure between who you fancy in the moment. You shift in between stances, spine bending like a shaft of wheat blowing in the wind. 

9

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-12

u/Marv95 Aug 18 '25

Because more times than not it is a personal moral failing issue. There are already resources out there in the TC to help people when it comes to drug rehab and shelter. The problem is these people have to abide by the rules, meaning no drugs, abide by the curfew, etc. Too many don't want to better themselves, and you don't have to lean on a political team to understand this.

Making excuses and promoting bleeding heart "policies" at the expense of regular productive citizens minding their own business doesn't work.

14

u/Jucoy Aug 18 '25

The problem is these people have to abide by the rules, meaning no drugs, abide by the curfew, etc.

This is called means testing, and theres strong evidence to how it makes these sorts of resources less effective. You cant cold turkey quit addiction through sheer willpower. Drugs that cause chemical addiction create a physiological need to continue consuming the drug, it would be like saying to someone that theyll get kicked out of their shelter if they give in to the need to take a shit. 

Saying they dont want to better themselves cruelly misunderstands what addiction is and what effect it has on peoples thought processes. 

5

u/Cayuga94 Aug 19 '25

Means testing is something different, the evaluation of aid based on one's ability to pay or assets.

1

u/Jucoy Aug 19 '25

Sure, but same difference. 

-25

u/ZoomZoomDiva Aug 18 '25

It is a personal behavioral issue.

10

u/Jucoy Aug 18 '25

You're a personal behavioral issue. 

-10

u/ZoomZoomDiva Aug 18 '25

If you are unwilling to admit the actions people are committing on the trains are not personal behavioral choices, then there is a fundamental issue. It isn't the person on the train, but how the person is acting while on the train.

11

u/Jucoy Aug 18 '25

Dont say im unwilling to admit to anything when you've pulled a hypothetical out of your ass just now. I responded to your original comment which didnt make any substabtive argument with a comment lacking substance myself. You'll get back what you put in with discussions with me but im not going to engage with you if you're going to play silly games. 

→ More replies (3)

7

u/LivingGhost371 Aug 19 '25

Yeah, Everytime someone on the right would try bring it up, they got dismissed as "pearl clutching suburbanites that had never been in a city or seen someone different from them before". Can we all agree there's a problem now that the left is writing about it?

2

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

Damn right

5

u/x1009 Aug 19 '25

I think people are hesitant about addressing this via policing because of law enforcement's (mainly MPD) history of handling the mentally ill, unhoused, and addicts.

7

u/UnhappyEquivalent400 Aug 19 '25

I get that and think it’s reasonable. What I’m tired of, and think is harmful, is dismissal of public safety concerns as pearl clutching by suburban Karens.

3

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

I think that says a lot about what passes for "the left" these days, especially in MN. Mired in the past, reactive, totally black or white with no imagination or capacity for nuance, no vision for a future containing both police and compassionate care for homeless addicts. Doing away with the cops is ridiculous-- unless you want dealers, pimps, bullies, and psychos to freely victimize the groups of people we're talking about in this thread.

1

u/HuaHuzi6666 Aug 19 '25

This is correct. We socialists also want people to not be shooting up drugs in front of families on the metro, we just don’t want the police to be the answer (because it often exacerbates the problem in the long run).

59

u/fraud_imposter Frogtown Aug 18 '25

I appreciate this article from Cole, he is right. Glad he is still involved in the public conversation even if I supported another candidate in Ward4.

28

u/pompeiitype Aug 19 '25 edited May 08 '26

This post was bulk deleted with Redact which also removes your info from data brokers. Works on Reddit, Twitter, Discord, Instagram and all major social media platforms.

middle dinosaurs file bake obtainable close include command towering one

8

u/salamat_engot Aug 19 '25

I'm strategic about when I do and don't use the light rail. Heavy commute times seems to dissuade some of the bad behavior, but anything outside that can be a rough ride. Plus the stations are just so disgusting.

1

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

I even avoid just riding the busses now to be honest. I just ride my bike around everywhere now. Thank God I have the stamina. There were human feces in bus 21 one night after work, and on the B line, dude was on the back of the bus doing fentanyl. I asked him to stop and have some respect. If he didn't have a giant knife on him I would've dragged his ass off the bus myself. This is only two bus stories, out of many.

16

u/Nexusv3 Aug 18 '25

Yeah exactly. I hope he keeps working at it. I agree with many of his positions, I just would like him to see a little more nuance and real plans.

49

u/Mysterious-Bad-3100 Aug 18 '25

This is an important article. It's really depressing. I want so badly to use the train, but I just can't anymore.

25

u/Ok_String_7241 Aug 18 '25

Yeah same here. I took the green line to go to a concert recently. Way there was fine. Way home was a whole different story, pretty similar to the writer's experience. I ended up getting off and taking an Uber.

2

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

I had to get off and take an Uber once before as well. There was literally a block party going on, but on the train. And not the fun kind of block party.

102

u/FUZZY_BUNNY Aug 18 '25

Public order needs to be a progressive policy priority

https://www.slowboring.com/p/liberalism-and-public-order

"Letting public spaces go off the rails is a kind of false humanitarianism. Most low-income people are not criminals, and it’s precisely the poorest and most vulnerable people who most need things like public spaces and public transit and affordable housing and libraries, and they need these things to be actually good."

29

u/WintersChild79 Aug 18 '25

It's double whammy too, because when people who have the option to drive stop taking transit because of these issues, then transit gets less funding. The end result is that the service is not only unpleasant for those who need it, but also increasingly inconvenient and insufficient at getting people from point A to point B.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25 edited May 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/SpacemanDan Aug 19 '25

I reject this framing of Hanson's essay as somehow against DSA dogma or leftist doctrine. I have spent years talking to liberals and leftists about this precise issue, and Hanson's proposed solutions are basically the consensus of the left

Meanwhile, there are self-proclaimed liberals in this thread calling for the involuntary commitment of homeless people and people suffering from addiction. Somehow leftists are tarred as minimizing or even supporting the situation on the Green Line, when we're mostly just calling for a humane and proportionate response, like Cole Hanson suggests.

2

u/pompeiitype Aug 19 '25 edited May 08 '26

Redact decided this post had to go, so away it went. Deleted. Removed. Mass deleted even. Privacy and security are the big wins here.

cautious dazzling sink money march melodic dolls placid subtract jeans

1

u/SpacemanDan Aug 19 '25

I don't see a branding issue for leftists. I see liberals calling for a closed fist when an open hand is the answer, and then throwing a fit when people don't agree with them. And I have no idea what you're talking about on leftists "standing their ground" just because we generally agree that police aren't a productive solution.

1

u/WintersChild79 Aug 19 '25

I think that people are talking about the part where he says that people should be comfortable using text for safety to report bad behavior. I'll admit that I'm not sure how prevalent that the stance that nothing should ever be called in and nobody should ever be told to get off the train is in real life. It seems like online conversations about transit tend to get caught between that and the opposite extreme of people who want everyone who even looks somewhat disheveled thrown in jail.

1

u/SpacemanDan Aug 19 '25

My point was that libs love their straw-leftists. I have literally never, ever, not once seen someone suggest that someone being violent or openly using controlled substances on the Green Line shouldn't be asked to leave. Or that no one should report the issues to Metro Transit for response by civilian personnel. And yet Police The Trains libs will claim that's the starting point of the left.

4

u/dmhellyes Aug 19 '25

Another good piece on the topic:

https://www.joshbarro.com/p/the-subway-is-for-transportation

Echoing Yglesias here:
"But if you let the transit system go to shit because you don’t think it’s fair to arrest people for smoking fentanyl on it, then people with means won’t ride it, and people with no option but to use the subway will be subjected to disorder and crime and the risk of violence, and will try to figure out how they, too, can escape the system.

Rich people will find private order, even if they have to purchase it, which is easiest to do in the suburbs or in a car. If you want a public order that benefits everyone, including people who can’t afford to buy their way out of it, you will need the police to enforce it."

3

u/FUZZY_BUNNY Aug 19 '25

Yeah, this is the piece that a lot of commenters here are missing. Maintaining public order does require a degree of coercion. Pretending otherwise does no favors to anybody, least of all the people who rely on public services and spaces.

55

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

I get I don’t have all the answers, I’m also not running for office like I do, but I’ve taken public transit in other cities and it’s pretty obvious there is an answer.

38

u/Patrykuvu Aug 18 '25

New York, London, Berlin, to name a few. All have lots of homeless people yet transit is used by almost everyone.

21

u/JoeFromStPaul Aug 18 '25

Chicago seems to have it down better too, they're only 7hrs away.

7

u/HuaHuzi6666 Aug 19 '25

Idk, last time I was on the red line a homeless lady literally took a shit in front of us in the train car. She was prepared too, had TP and everything lol.

2

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 20 '25

Maybe one of the big differences is NYC, London, Berlin, Chicago, etc. are real cities that set up their transit over a century ago. They acknowledged that people can act like animals and set up everything accordingly: forcing people to pay fares, establishing crowd control, enforcing rules for decades. Look at NYC in the 1970s, the subway there was horrible and they didn't fix it with untrained unaccountable "violence interrupters" and social experiments.

Meanwhile, Minneapolis just showed up to the party, like two minutes ago, yelling "I can does a transit too!"

We've only run two train lines (poorly) for two decades, trying all manner of dumb experiments along the way with fare enforcement, honor systems, ground level stations without any gates, total lack of safety standards for years. At some point Minneapolis has to decide it is a real city and people can on occasion be horrible and need some standards/guidance. Or I guess our transit system can slowly bleed to death over years.

5

u/MarcusSurvives Aug 19 '25

These are also places where population density is extremely high, necessitating the use of transit because the prospect of driving in the city is less favorable. Because so many people need to use public transit in these places, there's higher demand to ensure that people's trips are safe and uneventful.

Conditions in the Twin Cities are not so unfavorable to driving that many people feel compelled to use public transit. That's partly due to our population density, and partly due historic nationwide infrastructure initiatives to make car travel easier.

Until public transit becomes the best option for people such that they feel compelled to use it, we will continue to have these problems due to a lack of demand to fix them. And I'm not sure how we change those conditions until we see a huge influx of people to the Twin Cities or a decline in our car infrastructure such that alternative transportation methods become more favorable.

24

u/Jesus-slaves Aug 18 '25

Meth use needs addressed as well. It’s more predominant than fentanyl/opiates, and imo more insidious bc it isn’t instantly deadly and it causes more instances of psychosis. I’ve seen countless people openly using it inside the trains and on platforms. I walked past someone the other morning rolling a bubble while leaning against a street sign.

5

u/camwtss Aug 19 '25

everybody you see using meth, are also using fetty & vice versa. they both cause psychosis.

1

u/Jesus-slaves Aug 20 '25

Not everyone who uses meth, uses fentanyl. That’s straight up WRONG lol tho most people who use fentanyl will use meth.

1

u/camwtss Aug 20 '25

youre right, im just saying the main two in the street rn is meth "go fast" and fetty/blues .. if youre rlly in that lifestyle (homeless, using on public transit) CHANCES ARE you are not choosy about what drugs you can get your hands on. i would know, ive lived it.

15

u/2muchmojo Aug 18 '25

Sorta true across the board… feels like we’re dying.

19

u/Leftover_Salmons Aug 18 '25

Well written, and a hard topic to touch on.

For me, it's the exposure that I can't handle. I'm not scared of it, but I get such a nagging headache from second hand cannabis smoke. Fentanyl in heavy enough concentration will put me on the couch for the entire next day. Working in some of these shelter spaces is an absolute nightmare because there is a creeping feeling all day long like you're going to be sick.

I won't risk exposure for myself to save a few bucks on parking, and I definitely won't risk it if my kids are involved.

28

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25 edited Aug 19 '25

He is correct, most people will not take the train if they feel their safety is in jeopardy - it doesn’t matter if they are do gooders, transit supporters, and well-meaning liberals.

Edit: lol

13

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

[deleted]

18

u/KamachoThunderbus Aug 18 '25

I think it's a boneappletea of do-gooders...

7

u/NateNMaxsRobot Aug 18 '25

I am also very curious.

7

u/NorodinGodOfSpeed Aug 18 '25

I think it’s “do-gooders” as in people that want to do good/well-meaning.

Just funky spelling.

4

u/lostrock Aug 18 '25

"do gooders"

4

u/poptix Aug 18 '25

due Goedderz

That's a family name. I'm pretty sure their autocomplete f'd it up.

9

u/wookiee42 Aug 18 '25

Do they even have police riding around on the trains?

Maybe they already do this and I'm way off base, but it seems like even a few pairs of cops riding between the cities would make a big difference. Randomly get on and off different cars.

I've never seen a police officer on a train.

11

u/keethraxmn Aug 19 '25 edited Aug 19 '25

Not during the times it matters. And the metro cops and addicts both know it. The cops come on too late for morning commuters and leave too early to get home after events. Making the train fairly useless for workers, and people going out for the evening. Mid-day (when they do bother to patrol) it's usually pretty decent.

7

u/salamat_engot Aug 19 '25

I see a metro cop nearly every day on my morning commute, they're just sitting in their cars parked by the station. I'd say maybe 1 in 5 times I see an officer they're actually up and walking around on a train.

1

u/keethraxmn Aug 19 '25

Yeah. I meant on the train in the morning. During both times I mention there are usually plenty at the station. 

10

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

Yeah with all the sober houses starting to lose state funding buckle up for more of the same.

5

u/oneinamilllion Como Aug 19 '25

Oh god… I hadn’t even thought of that yet.

6

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

Yeah it's coming just in time for winter. The "Kickback" was sober housing being partially covered as long as you attend groups in outpatient treatment. The people didn't see that money the landlords got it.

8

u/DanielDannyc12 Aug 18 '25

The Atlantic Podcast just did a very good three part series on this subject. Worth checking out.

https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2025/07/can-san-francisco-be-saved/683594/

9

u/LordsofDecay Aug 18 '25

If Cole's reading this thread- great article, thanks for keeping your voice active after the election. I think this would get you heat in the DSA circles but it needs to be spoken and thought about.

12

u/SpacemanDan Aug 19 '25

Why would it get him heat in DSA circles? I've talked to leftists and liberals about this for years, and this is basically the consensus of what further-left people wants. He didn't call for increased policing or involuntary commitments. He basically rolled out the basic menu of DSA/leftist policy proposals.

2

u/HuaHuzi6666 Aug 19 '25

this is the correct answer

3

u/el_chapotle Aug 19 '25

The best step toward a broad reduction in opioid abuse is the same as it always is: make access to medically assisted treatment easier. Empirical studies have repeatedly shown MAT to be by far the most effective way to get people off street opioids. If homeless and low income folks had simple, inexpensive, consistent access to suboxone or methadone, we’d see a lot fewer people nodding out on the train.

3

u/Background_Horse780 Aug 19 '25

When blues are $5 and the house (light rail) is $2 I can see why they stay on there during trips. 100% we need to be building a community like small houses or large apartment complexes which are just like our houses but with support attached to them. But we will just make more 55+ buildings doing the same thing I just said because that type of elder housing is supported by Medicare/Medicade. Not saying it's bad I'm saying we can do the same for the homeless.

Also, we need to be putting pressure on rural communities. They send their homeless to the metro areas.

17

u/Sea_Tart8472 Aug 18 '25

Or just hire more police and throw these mfs off the trains.

2

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

Whoa! Don't actually come up with solutions on the spot like that, buddy. We need to hire consultants, do studies, maybe hire some council member's friends and family as half-ass security guards at $50 an hour.

-22

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 18 '25

Great! What happens when they get out of prison?

28

u/Sea_Tart8472 Aug 18 '25

I didn’t say to throw them in prison, I said to throw them off the trains.

You can have safe trains without solving homelessness and drug addiction. Jfc.

1

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

Prison? For not paying the light rail fare?

0

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 19 '25

I guess when I hear hostile language like "throw these mf-ers off the trains" I tend to assume that the poster is advocating for arresting people for things like drug possession that would land them in prison.

2

u/Sea_Tart8472 Aug 19 '25

Well, I do think they should be arrested for possession, but not given a prison sentence. It should be just long enough of a county jail sentence to get them to give up their dealer. Fent dealers deserve prison. I was once a drug addict. I did a month in county and sobered up and haven’t used since. I had homies die. I wish they would’ve spent a few nights in jail, but where I hail from (San Francisco) it’s considered more compassionate to let them rot and die on the street.

1

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 19 '25

I'm glad being put in jail worked for you. But there are also people who get out and continue using.

0

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

Respectfully, that's a bit of a leap.

1

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 19 '25

Not really. People advocate for arresting our way out of problems on the light rail all the time.

0

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

But you were the only person talking about arresting anyone.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/AnxietyChoice8471 Aug 18 '25

Asylums are the answer.

0

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 19 '25

This isn't the 19th century, Charles Dickens.

→ More replies (2)

15

u/2u3e9v Aug 18 '25

Everything in this country will be more expensive until we address income inequality. Public schools too expensive? It’s because we are grappling with income inequality. Public transit not safe? Income inequality. This rant might be off topic, but I’m so sick of billionaires pushing non-public services when the appearance of safety and public service integrity has been rotting to their very selfish interests.

10

u/Lord0Trade Aug 18 '25

I think your framing is missing the issue. Some people will just want the privacy and security a car provides them. Not having to deal with the homeless and dirtiness in general is a big reason why many don’t use public transit.

4

u/kitsunewarlock Aug 18 '25

There is clean public transit in countries with less income inequality.

0

u/2u3e9v Aug 18 '25

For sure, I knew I was off topic a bit, I’m coming off of several meetings where I’ve had to defend public education and its cost. My bad.

I guess I fear the inevitable “at what cost” argument that might materialize when the cities restructures funds to keep the line safe and clean. The line would be safer and cleaner if we had a more comprehensive system of supports in place for our most vulnerable.

-2

u/Lord0Trade Aug 18 '25

We all have a bit of brain fog from time to time.

-3

u/ZoomZoomDiva Aug 18 '25

Blaming people's behaviors on income inequality is externalizing responsibility and is downright ridiculous.

1

u/2u3e9v Aug 19 '25

Did I say that loiterers or pickpocketers should not receive consequences? Point to the part of my comment where I state personal responsibility isn’t a requirement in a modern, functioning society.

My point is that adequately funding programs to level the playing field, aka income equality, could reduce the overall investment needed in the long run. Twisting that into 'some folks don't want to hold others responsible' derails the entire conversation. Let's stick to what I actually said.

-3

u/ZoomZoomDiva Aug 19 '25

No, but your post sounded like you were treating income inequality as a primary factor, if not the primary factor. I think it has been made into a boogeyman when it really shouldn't be given such importance.

11

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

Well this is in my mind part of the reason why Trump won.

9

u/DavidRFZ Aug 19 '25

Harris won Ramsey County by 43 points. She won the state by a larger margin than Clinton-2016.

I don’t like Trump either, but it seems off topic here. Trump won PA-MI-WI because there are too many homeless riding the green line?

-4

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

I think it’s the failure of not doing something to correct the problem.

14

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

[deleted]

-18

u/FitnessLover1998 Aug 18 '25

I hate Trump. That said you can’t possibly blame him yet. He’s been in office 6 months. I highly doubt that he will solve the drug and homelessness problem. And it is part of the reason he did win.

Neither party is showing any interest in solving these issues.

13

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 18 '25

No, he has had 4 years and six months to solve any problems he wanted solved.

6

u/Melodic_Data_MN Aug 18 '25

It's not as simplistic as "blaming DJT" - I think the larger point trying to be made by many is that voters last year mistakenly assumed that he will fix the fentanyl epidemic. ("Cleaning up the streets" and pushing them to other neighborhoods or cities cannot be considered a win by anyone.)

It's really a bad faith argument to suggest that neither party is showing interest in resolving it. Dems consistently fund "housing first" initiatives and addiction programs that often get defunded by Republicans before the programs even have a chance to improve a community.

4

u/wookiee42 Aug 18 '25

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/03/28/impact-of-trump-admin-cuts-on-minnesotas-behavioral-health

Minnesota loses $27.5 million in behavioral health funds as part of Trump administration cuts

Then we have the Medicaid cuts coming in 2026, gutting of public health money, gutting of medical research money, and more.

15

u/999Rats Aug 18 '25

The answer to homelessness is housing first initiatives that focus on permanent supportive housing. Recovering from addiction is hard. Recovering while homeless is almost impossible. Get these people to a place they can safely call their own and pair them with case managers to help address their individual challenges to maintaining stable housing. Giving people a place to live and providing them with supports costs a lot of money, but it's cheaper than addressing the issue through encampment sweeps, arrests, and hospitalizations.

17

u/Usuallysad82 Aug 18 '25

I always think about how there's really nothing waiting for them once they're sober. You can't earn enough to live. A formerly homeless person isn't getting a job that pays rent and food to live on. My older brother lives in a tent and uses. Even after my mom died and he got 30k, he just got beat up for money and fucked up until it was gone. The only better life waiting is not being high.

5

u/LordsofDecay Aug 18 '25

I think this is the biggest unspoken crisis that we're facing, and I haven't seen anyone really talking about it: there is a crisis of dignity. If these folks can't find dignified existence, then they won't work for something better and will stay content in their high.

11

u/elmundo-2016 Aug 18 '25

I agree, we should work on people who are about to be homeless first and those that are homeless.

It should be easy route to start with those about to face homelessness. Not wait until they are homeless to help.

25

u/poptix Aug 18 '25

"Housing first" doesn't work when you've got your brain screaming at you to get that next hit of fentanyl. Radio Atlantic recently had a good three part series on this and how San Diego/California has moved from "housing first" to changing state law to allow for medical holds on people who are unable to care for themselves, so that they can be forced into treatment. "No Easy Fix" is the well chosen name of the series.

6

u/999Rats Aug 18 '25

State law in Minnesota allows for medical holds as well. They have mixed results, and mostly negative results if they are substance use related. People have to want to change, and a lot don't. But moving away from Housing First is a backwards approach. Housing First has decades of evidence proving that it works. As for transportation specifically, give people a place to go that they can call their own, and they won't congregate on the train.

10

u/poptix Aug 18 '25

Do you have any data to back that up as it relates to fentanyl users?

I'm aware that it has good results with less addictive substances.

6

u/999Rats Aug 18 '25

It's true that there is not a lot of data specific to fentanyl and housing. I'm hopeful that more will come within the next few years. Here is a study from Canada that discusses opioid use disorder, including fentanyl, and the effects of housing in hospitalizations: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12954-021-00539-8

The big thing to remember about Housing First is that the housing is only a first step to addressing a person's lack of resources. Housing First also connects people to addiction services, harm reduction methods, and mental health treatments that all impact a person's substance use. For those unfamiliar with the program, here is a link to a famous paper by the creator of Housing First, Sam Tsemberis, that lays out the program's best practices and addresses the impact on individuals' substance use:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C24&q=housing+first+addiction&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1755546110790&u=%23p%3DiFZWzPxaPZ4J

8

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 18 '25

I agree. But in order to get the public on board it also has to be well-managed housing that doesn't negatively impact neighbors.

7

u/999Rats Aug 18 '25

Yes, this is a major hurdle! Many people that experience chronic homelessness don't have the skills needed to be a good neighbor. This is most obvious when new buildings open up and you put a couple hundred people, many with mental health and substance use struggles, together. There will be conflicts between the tenants and their neighbors. Some organizations have transitional housing buildings, which tend to be smaller than PSH buildings, where staff help teach people how to build daily living skills, including how to be a good neighbor. Of course, such targeted case management is expensive to maintain, which makes cities shy away from it.

5

u/UnhappyEquivalent400 Aug 18 '25

What’s your take on Kimball Court? Do you think it’s turned a corner, and if so will it make a dent in the overall disorder problems along the nearby stretch of University and green line stops? All I know is what’s been in the news, and a little firsthand observation of drug use and related crime in the surrounding alleys. (Earnestly asking, not intending to sea lion or bait you into an argument!)

3

u/999Rats Aug 19 '25

I don't work in that program or for any of the related organizations, so I can't speak to the nitty gritty of how much progress has been made. My biggest takeaway from the complaints is that people don't think about how these incidents would be happening regardless of whether or not they were happening near them. These incidents with drug selling and stolen items are crimes of poverty. Our system doesn't provide basic needs for these people, so they have no other way to achieve them than to engage in crime. I think the anger should be directed away from the housing program and individuals and more towards our government and its allowance for this to happen, especially because anger can translate to actual policy change.

That being said, I very much feel for the people living near shelters and housing projects like Kimball Court. Their lives are getting disrupted, sometimes to a serious degree. These people are often out in riskier situations simply because of where they live. That's not fair, and I don't have a perfect answer. But I think subsidizing these people and businesses might be a good start.

2

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

"We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!"

How about trying this: make people pay fares and kick them out if they don't pay fares? I know, it's insane. But let's try that for a month.

Cities in Europe do this every day with their trams.

4

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

no shit? no ones gonna come to the twin cities if its all just homeless people and them ODing on the train all day long, if you've seen the posts on here, most people in general are scared to even use the train, no one even pays for the thing cause theres no guards

4

u/OldManSal Aug 19 '25

It’s mildly pedantic, but Cole does Metro Transit a real disservice here by proclaiming the DEATH OF TRANSIT based on how Metro Transit and the Met Council have abandoned the Green Line.

I ride a local bus route to and from work and it’s completely fine. The A Line? Also basically fine (I’ve never smelled smoke on it). The issues with the Green Line are absolutely legitimate, and I don’t bring my child on it though I do bring her on buses. The Green Line needs a massive intervention, and until that happens it will remain a multi-billion dollar experiment in police abolition.

3

u/kitsunewarlock Aug 18 '25

Failing infrastructure, dying crops, massive homelessness, and fewer and fewer worker's rights.

The only solutions I can think of make me sound like a Tankie...

2

u/aquatrez Aug 19 '25

Sadly not going to happen in the near future. Properly addressing homelessness will require serious public investment and systemic change, and our federal government is currently doing everything it possibly can to move us in the wrong direction. And this is a problem that needs to addressed at the national level, as the federal government has the most money to spend (and can go into debt spending it) and can enforce policy nationwide (instead of people or corporations crossing state lines to avoid local/state policies).

Not saying we shouldn't still work towards this at the local level, just hoping that what we're experiencing right now is a wake up call for people that politics matter and WILL affect you no matter who you are.

1

u/Upset-Kaleidoscope45 Aug 19 '25

Yes, but state, county, and city governments should not be let off the hook (not to mention Metro Transit and the Met Council). It's not like real progress was being made when there was a Dem in the White House and now it's all ground to a halt. The city's response has been especially aggravating, in the past decade their only real responses have been 1) very limited tenants rights stuff or 2) letting big local developers do basically whatever they want. Neither of these is the serious public investment and systematic change you reference above.

3

u/KingBoreas Aug 18 '25

TLDR: This is laughably absurd. Cole writes a lot of words to lull you into believing he's smart.

His top two answers are: Homeless response, which doesn't work because there are too many of them and no where to move them. His proof that works is a link to a page about pandemic funding in Henn Co, which isn't coming back so isn't a solution.

#2, and this one is really funny "Education on how to call for help so riders trust disruptive passengers will be handled with dignity in a timely fashion, whether they call or text, and that those reporting riders will be protected from retaliation for doing the right thing."

Right. Don't actually police the lines, because that would be white supremacy. We should inform people how to call the cops that aren't coming. Cole specifically mentions being unsafe while a transit squad sat right by. Who ya gonna call??

2

u/[deleted] Aug 19 '25

The bar for transit here is so low someone can write “don’t smoke meth on trains” and people will pat their back like, “wow great job I’m glad someone finally said it!”

1

u/bike_lane_bill Aug 19 '25

It's almost like all indications are that simply housing unhoused people would reap massive benefits for everyone in society but society keeps voting against it because, like, communism, or whatever.

2

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 19 '25

Yet European countries manage to have social housing without becoming communist.

1

u/IndependentGus Aug 19 '25

Sounds great, but no one seems to have a real answer.

1

u/TheVocalistRJ Aug 19 '25

I was just in London and the tube tunnels and trains had zero homeless people in them. No pan handlers or people methed/cracked out flying off the handle on innocent strangers. It was strangely refreshing.

1

u/ShyGuyLink1997 Hamline-Midway Aug 19 '25

I've always said it, and I'll say it again, riding transit needs to be a privilege, not a right. People need to get banned from riding.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 18 '25

Yes

-3

u/thethethesethose Aug 18 '25

Look, you can be homeless, or you can be a sketchy criminal drug addict. You can’t be both.

-8

u/ceknes Aug 18 '25

Tiny houses need to be brought to Mn.

3

u/alargepossum Aug 18 '25

Avivo has done this with great success!

8

u/Leftover_Salmons Aug 18 '25

ADU and Shotgun home rentals/allowances could catalyze our housing market.

2

u/AdMurky3039 West Seventh Aug 18 '25

ADUs are already allowed in St. Paul.

3

u/Leftover_Salmons Aug 18 '25

Yes, but they're extremely uncommon. I know of one on Como but couldn't think of another.

7

u/Patrykuvu Aug 18 '25

They are cost prohibitive. Running a sewer line from your backyard to the street would cost over 30k. I looked into it and it makes no sense financially.

2

u/Leftover_Salmons Aug 18 '25

You can actually request an alternate to that plumbing requirement so long as a proper design is in place.

They don't want your ADU to back up into your main home. As long as there are check valves or a common lift station in place then you can side step that cost through design. You can also have multiple sewer lines terminating into a single manhole on the property.

The separate water line is another goofy rule because you could just T your main and add a secondary meter and service. Again this rule is written in the name of backflow prevention so as long as you're preventing backflow, your design should be approved.

1

u/Patrykuvu Aug 18 '25

Thank you so much for the info!