Our political leaders — of all parties — are failing us again. And it was all perfectly foreseeable. In fact, it was quite literally baked into the most recent iteration of Vermont’s grossly inadequate policy on sheltering the homeless.

The damning details are available in “Vermont’s New Motel Room Limits Are Primed to Push Out Hundreds of Households This Fall,” posted Friday by shared VTDigger/Vermont Public reporter Carly Berlin (because homelessness isn’t a big enough issue to warrant separate reportage, apparenty). It’s not a pretty picture, not at all.

The headline should come as no surprise whatsoever, since the “new motel room limits” were designed “to push out hundreds of vulnerable households this fall.” The program is rolling out precisely as intended. Except, as Berlin’s piece makes clear, the looming reality is somehow even worse than that.

To recap the backstory, the House approved an emergency housing extension meant to keep motel clients sheltered. The Senate, spearheaded by Appropriations Committee Chair Jane Kitchel, balked. Its budget included an 80-day cap on motel stays starting on July 1, and (as of September 15) a 1,100-motel-room cap on the entire program. As I wrote at the time, the Senate plan was not intended to meet the actual need; it was designed to spread out the pain over time rather than risk the political and moral impact of a one-time mass unsheltering.

Well, as of August 12 there were 1,416 households in the program. In less than a month, we’ll be turning away hundreds of people. And need I remind that thanks to previous cuts in the program, it’s intended only for truly vulnerable people.

That 1,100-room cap will hit just about the time that people will be hitting their 80-day caps. Which I guess is what passes for good news? Fewer people will be eligible, so the room cap won’t hit quite so hard.

According to Berlin, “Officials had speculated whether program participants would ration their 80 days throughout the year, or use them all in one go.” With housing extremely difficult to come by and a lack of options for motel clients, that speculation has turned out to be more like wishful thinking. People are using up their 80 days and will run out well in advance of wintertime, when the program will be open to more people. State officials project that about one-third of all clients are on track to exhaust their eligibility by September 19. So again, hundreds of people will be unsheltered in about a month’s time.

State officials also say that everyone in the program right now “has a significant need.” I refer you to a Senate Approps hearing from last April when Kitchel desperately tossed Winters a softball: “Will you be putting somebody in a wheelchair out on the street?” Expecting the answer, “Of course not.”

Instead, Winters replied, “Hopefully not.” Because he knew better than to give false reassurance.

But wait, there’s more! Since July 1, about 300 more households have applied for motel vouchers. Even before those delightful caps come into play, there is significantly more demand than supply.

We’re on a collision course, and the official response consists of nothing more effective than shrugs, furrowed brows, and expressions of concern. Remember last fall, when Commissioner Chris Winters of the Department of Children and Families talked of an all-out effort to create 1,500 more shelter spaces by last April 1? It was incredibly ambitious, almost certainly impossible in fact, and in the end what we got instead was a handful of congregate shelters in unused state buildings that were open for precisely one week.

Since then? If there’s been a new administration plan to expand shelter, it’s news to me. Nope, we’re just driving straight off the cliff.

Meanwhile, even before the program ratchets down, municipalities are already struggling with the consequences. The city of Montpelier closed down an encampment near the old Elks Club, which triggered a protest outside City Hall and some lively discussion at a Council meeting. (I greatly value the insights of those who have lived experience, and I recommend Morgan W. Brown’s coverage in his “Green Mountain Meandering Missives” blog.) This included the unedifying spectacle of Mayor Jack McCullough doing his best Pontius Pilate impression, pleading lack of resources and expressing hope that the state will step up.

Well, we all know that ain’t happening, so.

And in Burlington, which is bearing the brunt of unsheltering, the city is seeking help from neighboring communities. I detect no onslaught of assistance there. The only faintly detectable sound amidst all the silence is the distant wringing of hands.

This is all, of course, not only a moral failure on our part, but it’s short-sighted as hell. The costs of dealing with unsheltered people is significantly higher than the cost of providing shelter. It just comes out of a variety of pockets, so you don’t see it all at once.

And thanks to a state policy designed to slow-roll the next unsheltering, and a Supreme Court decision allowing governments to shove the unsheltered out of immediate view, we might just be able to convince ourselves that we are not abjectly failing hundreds and hundreds of our most vulnerable people.