Opponents of homeless shelters say they are bad for the environment

Guardian:

The wealthy San Francisco residents who launched a crowdfunding campaign to block construction of a new homeless shelter in their waterfront neighborhood are employing a new tactic: arguing that homeless people are bad for the environment.

In a lawsuit filed against the city of San Francisco and the California State Lands Commission, the residents called for the project to undergo an environmental review before breaking ground.

“This project will have a significant effect on the environment due to these unusual circumstances, including by attracting additional homeless persons, open drug and alcohol use, crime, daily emergency calls, public urination and defecation, and other nuisances,” the lawsuit states.

Opponents of infrastructure and affordable housing projects often call upon the California Environmental Quality Act as a stalling ploy to delay construction. The law requires developers to explore any environmental effects a project might have, and take steps to reduce them.
...

Obviously, they have the public urination and defecation without the shelters and assuming the new facilities have toilets they would probably reduce that aspect of the problem.  It is likely that they would not reduce drug and alcohol use.  They could probably reduce all of that by committing these people to what used to be called insane asylums.  That would likely lead the saner homeless to seek other alternatives to living on the street. 

While it may sound crazy to some, taxing the homeless would also cause them to move on or leave.  If you want less of something tax it.