There is an ongoing fixation with San Francisco. National magazines and even international newspapers have written story after story about the potential doom spiral hitting the City by the Bay and theorizing on potential causes.
In a circle-the-wagons response, local officials and residents have countered by saying it’s still a majestic place with a free and easy spirit, great outdoor spaces, and innovative arts, dining and culture. They also suggest that the city is being unfairly targeted.
Both are true.
It’s not an either/or situation. San Francisco can be both beautiful and inspiring and tragic and depressing at the same time. In fact, that is the case right now. There are severe issues with open drug use and sales, homeless, violence and crime. There are also issues with retailers pulling out for any number of reasons and office work not coming back.
Homelessness is not a new issue in the city, but it has gotten worse in recent years. Open drug use is the same. Crime too. Those issues are certainly not unique to the city, or any city, but it is very bad there right now. If you deny that, you are delusional. The San Francisco Sheriff’s Office just activated its emergency service unit to address the fentanyl crisis and the mayor has enlisted the help of the National Guard and California Highway Patrol.
Add in the fact that some major retailers are pulling out of the city, along with this week’s news that two of the city’s biggest hotels plan to halt payments and give up on both properties, and there are some very real issues facing San Francisco right now.
It is easy to conflate the issues as they all seem connected, and in a sense they are. But it’s more complicated than that. It always is. San Francisco has long leaned on its beauty and reputation and that was often enough — so other issues lingered without solution. The pandemic did a number on the financial district and working from home seemed to stick. Ancillary businesses suffered. Retail is also shifting and that hasn’t helped. Then the lingering issues with homelessness and drugs festered and grew, fueled by fentanyl and its horrors.
As someone who was born in San Francisco, lived there three times, and lived near it most of my life, I know the city has changed much over the years from when my father told me I wasn’t allowed to wear white shoes there after Labor Day. There are homeless people, drug use and crime. It’s life in the city.
But it was nowhere near the levels of today, where I have seen men openly masturbate or urinate in public, people shoot up drugs and openly exhibit signs of drug-induced stupors, and stolen goods openly displayed for sale. How is it that a man can be passed out in the middle of the sidewalk with his pants around his ankles and no one will help for fear of potential violence or harm? We wouldn’t allow someone with dementia or Alzheimer’s disease to wander the streets self-medicating, so why do we, as a society, allow for those with a disease — and drug addiction is a disease — waste away on those same streets?
Every person living on the street has a family and a past and a potential future; and yet, we have somehow decided that the best course of action is to let it be. It’s wrong. This is not just a crisis for the city, but a crisis for its people who find themselves addicted and living on its streets. It is a crisis for all of us.
This is one of the reasons why the Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment Act is important and needed. By next year, the act will compel every county in California to implement its plan to get people suffering severe psychosis and addiction into treatment through a judge’s order.
Family, medical professionals and first responders can make the request for such an order. San Francisco must set this up by Oct. 1. There have been concerns about civil liberties and freedom for those living on the street and potential for abuse of power. Yet, the current situation is no longer tenable. Nor is it humane.
Under the chatter about the potential ruination of San Francisco and its potential causes and the cross-chatter about its beauty and promise are lives of thousands of people in peril who are afflicted with a terrible disease. They need help. Let’s not forget that. When the focus is on people, then other issues tend to fall in line. I suspect that will be the case here as well.
Jon Mays is the editor-in-chief of the Daily Journal. He can be reached at jon@smdailyjournal.com. Follow Jon on Twitter @jonmays.
{{description}}
Email notifications are only sent once a day, and only if there are new matching items.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(7) comments
When I first started working in San Francisco the buildings had multiple tenants. Now there are many single tenant buildings. In 2018 Prop C was passed which seemed to tax financial related companies the most and has led to their exodus from the City. Measure C should be repealed, so there is a better diversity of tenants. I used to work on Spear Street and at the time Rincon Center and One Market had zero restaurant vacancy (I used to like Pasta Paradiso and Theo's Cheesesteaks) even before Covid there were only a couple of choices. Tech often provides lunch. Whereas financial related businesses have meetings and lunches that are catered by the restaurants. One bright spot is we recently changed offices and are in the Jackson Square area, this seems to be a more active neighborhood and fewer homeless.
Completely agree with Thomas here on Prop C it was a step too far and the City should repeal along with other steps to make it an attractive destination for business again
Jon - there is no political willingness to solve the filth and devastation. CARA and CASA will not help if the targeted population is not willing to cooperate. By now it is clear that the homeless industry, comprising literally hundreds of NGOs, are not about to be deprived of funding. The last mayor who had a handle on this was Willy Brown and he had instructed Public Works to wash down the sidewalks where these bums were hanging out. We need to follow the money, but until the San Francisco voters do not seem interested in electing responsible leadership, we ought to be grateful that we don't experience this blight in our county.
Hi, Dirk
The "homeless industry" has been discussed in these pages. As I recall, a regular DJ columnist is planning on writing about homelessness and about how the problem seems to be getting worse even though billions and billions are being spent.
"It's still a majestic place..." Reminds me of the wizard of oz who said "pay no attention" to the man behind the curtain. Or the reporter who asked Mrs. Lincoln "besides that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?" San Francisco became a city where everything goes. Now it has gone and went.
The pendulum has swung as far to the left that it can. Time to put humanity first. I love this editorial. I hope the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Act will be the solution.
Thank you for this! I am hopeful that the CARE Act will help and have an idea that might allay some of the civil liberties concerns. Children in foster care can be assigned Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) by a judge who are trained volunteers who serve as "eyes and ears" for the judge and meet with the children on a regular basis. Similarly, the Ombudsman Program in San Mateo County helps to protect the rights of seniors living in long-term care situations. Trained volunteers visit facilities all year long and get to know residents and staff and know how those programs can and should work. If needed, they can advocate for residents who feel they are not being treated fairly or within the law. A CASA or Ombudsman style of program for people placed under the control of CARE Courts / and service agencies could go a long way to making sure that individual rights are being protected.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.