The new SF Fire Chief, Jeanine Nicholson, reports that ~70% of the homeless in certain areas of the city are from out of town, here seeking a hotel room.

Mayor Breed confirms in the video.

A few thoughts below. (1/x) http://bit.ly/38gWko1 

1) It makes sense that people who are homeless would come to SF. We are internationally famous for our compassion and have been since the 60s.

For a great description of the roots of this culture, I recommend you read this book. https://www.amazon.com/Season-Witch-Enchantment-Terror-Deliverance-ebook/dp/B005C6FDFY

2) SF Gov data backs this up. They have done surveys showing that only 43% have been here 10+ years.

I think we all have different definitions of what counts as "from here" - but safe to assume most people did not grow up in SF. https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/1292530038970015744?s=20

3) This data is controversial because it contradicts the narrative that homelessness is caused by the rising cost of housing.

While at a high level that is of course true, I have yet to see a stat showing that most of our homeless were prior renters in SF.

This video by @realchrisrufo is worth a watch.

He argues that the homelessness we see in SF is almost entirely caused by mental illness and drug addiction.

People pushed out by rising housing costs typically go to cheaper cities, not the streets.

4) Why does this matter? Because it impacts the solutions we come up with.

To say that homelessness will be solved by housing is problematic for a few reasons:
+ Our homeless desperately need care & treatment
+ Housing takes forever to build
+ Free housing lures people here

5) So what is happening? Basically not much.

The main advocacy group for the homeless, @TheCoalitionSF - fights tooth and nail against solutions that would significantly reduce suffering - mandatory treatment (e.g., conservatorship) & shelters.

@sfbos is aligned with them.

They argue that shelters are "warehousing" people - and that mandatory treatment/conservatorship is a violation of human rights.

Ask any mother of someone on the streets of SF what they think should be done. Every article I read - they all seem to be praying for intervention.

The more I research, the more I think the "housing first" POV is likely more harmful than helpful.

I believe this for two reasons.

1) It is impractical (8k homeless in SF, 150k in CA)
2) It leads to a lot of overdoses.

Here is a thread on that: https://twitter.com/michelletandler/status/1334520009544986625?s=20

It is my strong belief that more people exited homelessness from SF via death in the past year than to a better life.

We are on track for 700 overdoses, up from about 400 last year.

If this trend continues we will be in the thousands within a few years.

So while the Coalition & BOS squabble about building more units - and create maybe a few hundred a year tops - we have thousands suffering in the streets.

Additionally - this hotel situation is not sustainable. It is creating a magnet effect for SF.

According to the video by Rufo, homeless people are ~100x more likely to commit crimes than non-homeless.

My heart sinks at that stat. It is so painfully sad.

But it's something we need to reckon with. If we become a stronger magnet, crime will likely increase.

When we have a lot of street crime, residents and business owners get frustrated, angry & scared.

They lose their empathy and start to resent the homeless.

Willingness to support this population declines.

And what the homeless need is support. A lot of it.

We need treatment centers, shelters, & live/work programs that help people get back on their feet.

It doesn't matter if someone is "from here" or not. We need to care for the people landing on our doorstep.

Last year Mayor Breed spoke at her inauguration about our needing a "carrot & stick" approach to this problem.

I agree.

When SF is a place where ppl come to as Nicholson put it, "have a good time and get some housing,” -- we aren't solving problems.

We are creating them.

I believe the current strategy towards homelessness makes SF the #1 place in the world to come, do drugs, and be on a fast track to an early death.

This is false compassion, and our strategy is both intellectually and morally unsound.

It is not working. For anybody.

I believe we as citizens need to demand a review of our current strategy.

We need federal and state funding for treatment centers - away from the Tenderloin.

We need to shut down the open-air drug markets.

We need to use a data-driven approach.

We need to pass legislation that requires us to have a bed for each homeless person here. The entire East Coast has this law.

Can our city afford to give everybody a 1-bed in SF..? No.

But can we afford basic care for the sick & destitute? Yes.

We have the funds.

Soon we will have a vaccine. I think the homeless should be prioritized for it, and we should go into emergency mode for getting people off the streets.

It is the right thing to do, and it's the smart thing to do.

The status quo is wreaking havoc on lives & our city.

(fin)