Is "Fairness" Stalling Homeless Services?
Is Santa Fe’s Procedure Fetish & a Search for Fairness Stalling Effective Homeless Services?
"America has a procedure problem."
This is the opening line of The Procedure Fetish, a paper by Nicholas Bagley for the Niskanen Center (https://www.niskanencenter.org/the-procedure-fetish). In it, Bagley argues that our political culture is "in thrall to the belief that strict procedural rules are necessary to address pervasive anxiety about state power." According to Bagley, we tell ourselves two stories to justify this obsession:
Legitimacy: We need rigid procedures to justify the actions of a government the public views with suspicion.
Accountability: These rules give voice to the general public. They help hold government agencies and elected officials accountable to prevent powerful people and outside interests from holding too much influence.
While Bagley focuses on the federal government, I believe his framework is deeply relevant to small-town governance. When we analyze the actions of local administrations through this lens, we reveal motives that might otherwise stay hidden. Specifically, it allows us to debate whether these procedural "solutions" actually achieve their desired outcomes or simply create new roadblocks.
A perfect case study for this is a recent decision by the Santa Fe City Council regarding homeless services. In November 2025, The Santa Fe New Mexican reported on a council resolution requiring that pallet shelters be distributed evenly across all four city council districts (https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/city-council-resolution-sparks-debate-on-how-to-distribute-santa-fes-homeless-services/article_a4dbe797-ef2e-47e5-8ef5-9981b9f38d5b.html)
While Bagley focuses on the legitimacy of the "administrative state," I would argue that elected bodies also turn to rulemaking when they feel they have lost the trust of their constituents. When a governing body senses it is no longer trusted to make sound, discretionary decisions, it often retreats into misguided procedural rules. They claim they are making things "fair" or "even," but in reality, the process is designed to shield them from accountability.
Take the pallet shelter initiative. To date, Santa Fe has completed only one site, located at Christ Lutheran Church on Arroyo Chamiso. Since opening in March 2024 72% of users have either moved into permanent housing or secured vouchers and are on housing waitlists. Under normal circumstances, these results would mean a green light for more sites.
However, this success has been overshadowed by a public sentiment that homelessness has reached a crisis level. In an atmosphere where residents have lost confidence in leadership, the Council has responded not by doubling down on what works, but by embracing the procedure fetish.
By mandating geographic parity—insisting shelters be split evenly across four districts—the Council is using procedure as a political shield. On the surface, it masquerades as fairness. In reality, it creates an artificial constraint that ignores the logistical realities on the ground. If a perfect site with willing neighbors and proximity to transit opens up in District 1, it may now be rejected simply because District 3 doesn’t have a site yet. We are effectively sacrificing an effective tool to combat homelessness on the altar of "geographic balance."
Now, when the next project is delayed or a viable site is passed over, the Council can point to the rule and say, "Our hands are tied; we must be fair." If the city fails to address the crisis, they can blame the very process they created. This is not to say that the individual councilors are acting in bad faith. These are elected leaders who are genuinely trying their best to navigate increasingly complex problems. The true problem lies in the structural thesis that the government must be tied down and prevented from steamrolling the public. This is the way many people view the government - not as a solution provider but as a corruption magnet.
If Santa Fe is to solve its most pressing challenges, we must move past the belief that more rules equal better governance. The success at Christ Lutheran Church wasn’t the result of a geographic formula; it was the result of a dedicated community partner and a focus on moving people into homes.
To regain public trust, the City Council should stop looking for new procedural hoops to jump through and focus on what Bagley calls the "substance" of the issue. Legitimacy isn't found in a perfectly balanced map; it is found in the 72% of residents who are closer to having a roof over their heads. Until we prioritize results over the fetish of procedure, this crisis will continue.
