Yogi Berra was not only a great Yankee catcher and later manager, he also made up paradoxical comments like "It's deja vu all over again"; "It ain't over till it's over"; "The future is not what it used to be"; "When you come to a fork in the road, take it" Go to other people's funeral or else they won't go to yours." He described a popular city as being so popular that no one goes there anymore. This is true about my second favorite city, Venice. It has become a crowded Italian shopping center. The mayor has requested that tourists, especially day trippers, stay out of Venice.
I have lived in my favorite city, San Francisco, for almost 50 years and have seen a lot of changes - some for the good and others not so. We have many new skyscrapers, a much reduced murder rate and what had been great weather until a few years ago. The City is surrounded on three sides with water, has beautiful hills with great views, an excellent transit system and some City workers who actually work hard.
But we have one big problem, homelessness. Those we used to call derelicts, bums, tramps, and hobos are now called homeless, referring to their condition and not to their character. We know that the homeless are not to blame, it could have happened to any of us if we were addicted to drugs and alcohol for extended periods, if we committed serious crimes and were recently released from prison, couldn't holds a job or had serious personality or cognitive issues. Many have no friends or family willing or able to help them.
Our new mayor, London Breed, just realized how terrible this problem has become. She found streets and sidewalks strewn with feces, urine, garbage and dirty needles that were used to shoot drugs, usually heroin. She vows to do something about it.
I have made recommendations to alleviate homelessness. I was an analyst for the Department of Social Services, now called DHS, (not to be confused with Homeland Security) in the mid 70s. We had no real homeless problem. The indigent adults would go to General Assistance needing and getting someplace to stay, some food to eat, free transportation as well as medical coverage. The caseload had 3500 recipients. When Diane Feinstein became mayor, she had the police count the homeless, there were 600.
Now the problem has grown from 3500 people getting G.A./ Care Not Cash to 7,000 homeless half of whom live in the streets. There are another 6,000 who were and would be homeless if we were not providing long term residence with the costs of housing, food, and medical services also paid by the City. Where else could they relieve themselves? The current program costs about a half billion a year ($35,000 a year per person equal to more than $15 an hour of full-time work) when medical services are included.
I made my suggestions first to the Mayor's head of homelessness. He disregarded it especially about the SSI being used in part to pay the cost of their housing instead of spending it on drugs. I told him that it could be set up to make the City a sub-payee. He had never heard of this and didn't want to. He apparently believed that the SSI payment of almost $1,000 a month is the people's money and they should be able to spend it as they choose (they earned it).The homeless czar left his job to become a part-time elementary school volleyball coach.
I contacted my district supervisor's office and was told that they wouldn't let him spend the two minutes it would take to read my email. He later became acting Mayor.
I contacted the head of DHS, who did listen, but demurred.
I've written a column on this to no effect. My suggestion was to use the now old SFGH, which was replaced by a new one next door. The old hospital has 300 double occupancy rooms with private bathrooms for the two residents. Some of the floors could house the temporary disabled, the aged and disabled, (if Laguna Honda does not build a place for them again there). No one seemed to like this idea. "the building isn't earthquake safe." The "unsafe" building housed more than 1,000 people (including staff) a day for almost 30 years since our last quake which caused no damage to the structure. Is it worse than living outside?
Furthermore, I recommended that applicants be seen by admissions staff at SFGH. They could determine whether this person has permanent disability or is aged. They should be helped getting SSI, if they are not already receiving it. They should be given housing.
If they are found to have a temporary disability, they should be admitted to overcome the problem. If the temporary disability is alcohol or drug related, they should be entered into a rehab program.
If they are employable, they should be given unpaid part-time city jobs organized as is our SWAT program which has those convicted of minor crimes. These assignments could lead to permanent paid positions.
If they are mentally ill and need continued care, they should be referred to an appropriate institution for help. The City is reluctant to 5150 (admitting them for three days because they are a danger to themselves or others) a homeless person and is yet unwilling to have those who are deemed in desperate need of institutional care, conserved. They believe that the severely disturbed should be institutionalized only if they choose to. It's a catch 22: if they are sane enough to request placement, they don't need it; if they won't agree no matter how hard it gets, do not get to be sent for treatment. Few are conserved unless they want to be.
The problem with our homeless population explosion was not higher housing costs. It is mentioned that many of the homeless lived here before becoming homeless usually meaning that they came to town and lived somewhere for a few days or weeks. It is our city's laissez faire attitude about this issue. We believe that since those living in the streets are not to blame, they should not be required to conform to our values.
Our super liberal bias, is actually hurting the homeless, not helping them.
So San Francisco is a city that has so much poop that some people don't want to come here anymore.
I have lived in my favorite city, San Francisco, for almost 50 years and have seen a lot of changes - some for the good and others not so. We have many new skyscrapers, a much reduced murder rate and what had been great weather until a few years ago. The City is surrounded on three sides with water, has beautiful hills with great views, an excellent transit system and some City workers who actually work hard.
But we have one big problem, homelessness. Those we used to call derelicts, bums, tramps, and hobos are now called homeless, referring to their condition and not to their character. We know that the homeless are not to blame, it could have happened to any of us if we were addicted to drugs and alcohol for extended periods, if we committed serious crimes and were recently released from prison, couldn't holds a job or had serious personality or cognitive issues. Many have no friends or family willing or able to help them.
Our new mayor, London Breed, just realized how terrible this problem has become. She found streets and sidewalks strewn with feces, urine, garbage and dirty needles that were used to shoot drugs, usually heroin. She vows to do something about it.
I have made recommendations to alleviate homelessness. I was an analyst for the Department of Social Services, now called DHS, (not to be confused with Homeland Security) in the mid 70s. We had no real homeless problem. The indigent adults would go to General Assistance needing and getting someplace to stay, some food to eat, free transportation as well as medical coverage. The caseload had 3500 recipients. When Diane Feinstein became mayor, she had the police count the homeless, there were 600.
Now the problem has grown from 3500 people getting G.A./ Care Not Cash to 7,000 homeless half of whom live in the streets. There are another 6,000 who were and would be homeless if we were not providing long term residence with the costs of housing, food, and medical services also paid by the City. Where else could they relieve themselves? The current program costs about a half billion a year ($35,000 a year per person equal to more than $15 an hour of full-time work) when medical services are included.
I made my suggestions first to the Mayor's head of homelessness. He disregarded it especially about the SSI being used in part to pay the cost of their housing instead of spending it on drugs. I told him that it could be set up to make the City a sub-payee. He had never heard of this and didn't want to. He apparently believed that the SSI payment of almost $1,000 a month is the people's money and they should be able to spend it as they choose (they earned it).The homeless czar left his job to become a part-time elementary school volleyball coach.
I contacted my district supervisor's office and was told that they wouldn't let him spend the two minutes it would take to read my email. He later became acting Mayor.
I contacted the head of DHS, who did listen, but demurred.
I've written a column on this to no effect. My suggestion was to use the now old SFGH, which was replaced by a new one next door. The old hospital has 300 double occupancy rooms with private bathrooms for the two residents. Some of the floors could house the temporary disabled, the aged and disabled, (if Laguna Honda does not build a place for them again there). No one seemed to like this idea. "the building isn't earthquake safe." The "unsafe" building housed more than 1,000 people (including staff) a day for almost 30 years since our last quake which caused no damage to the structure. Is it worse than living outside?
Furthermore, I recommended that applicants be seen by admissions staff at SFGH. They could determine whether this person has permanent disability or is aged. They should be helped getting SSI, if they are not already receiving it. They should be given housing.
If they are found to have a temporary disability, they should be admitted to overcome the problem. If the temporary disability is alcohol or drug related, they should be entered into a rehab program.
If they are employable, they should be given unpaid part-time city jobs organized as is our SWAT program which has those convicted of minor crimes. These assignments could lead to permanent paid positions.
If they are mentally ill and need continued care, they should be referred to an appropriate institution for help. The City is reluctant to 5150 (admitting them for three days because they are a danger to themselves or others) a homeless person and is yet unwilling to have those who are deemed in desperate need of institutional care, conserved. They believe that the severely disturbed should be institutionalized only if they choose to. It's a catch 22: if they are sane enough to request placement, they don't need it; if they won't agree no matter how hard it gets, do not get to be sent for treatment. Few are conserved unless they want to be.
The problem with our homeless population explosion was not higher housing costs. It is mentioned that many of the homeless lived here before becoming homeless usually meaning that they came to town and lived somewhere for a few days or weeks. It is our city's laissez faire attitude about this issue. We believe that since those living in the streets are not to blame, they should not be required to conform to our values.
Our super liberal bias, is actually hurting the homeless, not helping them.
So San Francisco is a city that has so much poop that some people don't want to come here anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment