Read on Twitter
I cannot support this proposal as written, which would rely on a massive expansion of permitted tent camps, that lack adequate services or a pathway to housing, & that have a higher price tag than hotels, navigation centers, or even housing in some cases. https://twitter.com/MattHaneySF/status/1384562411055681536?s=20
The proposal lacked any budget or funding source, though permitted encampments are hugely expensive. It lacked support from the Department of Homelessness, or from people who are homeless, formerly homeless or work with people who are homeless in any sort of broad way.
What the city is doing now is failing: We have to move away from status quo. A bed in a big congregate shelter or "safe sleeping site" is usually the only spot being offered. We have a bed or piece of concrete for everyone currently, which aren't working & are overly expensive
We shouldn't be warehousing people in huge crowded shelters or on slabs of concrete, it is an approach that simply has not worked. People don't receive adequate services or case management, and many people refuse to go. I see that happen everyday, leaving people out on the street
What we've lacked is a real strategy and plan, that relies on a much more robust access to permanent supportive housing and vouchers, with a pipeline built with transitional housing/navigation centers. Prop C gives us an unprecedented opportunity to actually get that done.
Housing is the solution to homelessness without a doubt, but we also need ways for people to get of streets immediately. The model is the navigation center, not legalized tent camps, which would be a shameful path to go down as our central strategy to fight homelessness.
My colleagues and I authored an actual "place for all" at the beginning of the pandemic--when we required the city to secure hotel rooms for everyone on the street. The Mayor refused to implement it, which was a massive & costly missed opportunity.
I also authored a proposal, which I plan to bring back post pandemic, to build navigation centers in every district.
We DO need more transitional beds for people to get into immediately--they must include adequate services, pathway to housing, & be part of a larger plan.
We DO need more transitional beds for people to get into immediately--they must include adequate services, pathway to housing, & be part of a larger plan.
My commitment in coming months is to continue to work on: an aggressive expansion of transitional shelters, permanent supportive housing, vouchers, prevention, mental health & drug treatment, & purchasing hotels, as part of a larger comprehensive plan.
I hope folks will participate in the Our City Our Home planning and budgeting. I also hope you'll advocate for shelter beds and housing wherever you live. Nav Center beds & supportive housing are still concentrated overwhelmingly in D6, D10 & D9.
I appreciate everyone who called in and emailed in both opposition and support to this legislation, my colleagues, & the genuine care that people have for residents of our city who are experiencing homelessness. I hope we can work together & take bold steps to make progress, now.
The idea of dozens of large permitted tent camps all over our City would not be a solution. It's also highly unlikely and not cost effective. Let's focus on transitional shelter (navigation centers) with treatment & effective pathways to permanent housing and stability.
There are 22 shelter beds in D8, and 0 in some others. D6 has nearly 2000 shelter beds, 1000+ shelter in place hotel rooms, & 1000s of supportive housing beds. A good step towards a "place for all" would be more navigation centers and supportive housing all over the city.
I absolutely agree we should not have people sleeping on sidewalks, but this proposal would not accomplish that. Most people will not go to these large expensive tent camps, which do not actually solve for homelessness. They quite literally keep people living on the street.
There may be some role for safe sleeping sites as part of a larger strategy to get people off the street. The Mayor and Department can do that right now. They don't need legislation. They can fund these in their budget if they think they are more effective than other approaches.
For people who are like "at least it would have done something." It had no funding and no sites. It would have asked the City to return within 18 months with potential sites for tent camps. That's hardly the urgency and comprehensive approach we need to end homelessness.
