So the personal costs would be lower if they have no place to go at all?
Come on, these people need help and the great northern cities have facilities. Use those, too.
Or do you just not want the victims "in your back yard?"
Don't try to paint me as some heartless ass. You know nothing about me.
No place? There are plenty places they can go I'm sure that are closer to their homes. This entire country is huge, and so is the close-in region.
If anything we should try to shelter them as close to their homes as possible. I would think the advantages overall to the vast majority of them would be intuitively obvious. (Hey, it even includes the possibility they are kept closer to their family relations in the region - who might even claim them and house them!)
So maybe start w/big venues in the region; that could indeed include setting up camp in large open areas such as "open space" parks, farms, etc. Then it might include foster homes from private citizens.
Then branch it out from there a bit at a time, using the same procession, trying to minimize the radius and keep from being too far out from their native home and relatives.
Listen, I don't know just what the best answer is. I'm just thinking along these lines that might be best logistically for every1 - and it has NOTHING TO DO WITH *NIMBY*!