An opinion piece by Mayor London Breed, arguing that San Francisco can no longer tolerate homeless encampments, elicited dozens of comments from readers. The Standard is publishing a selection of these responses, received via email, which have been edited for clarity and brevity.
Must be an election year
Mayor Breed’s editorial in the SF Standard insists that *this time* it will be different. Gee, the upcoming mayoral election must be too close to call. We’ve seen this bad movie so many times. We absolutely expect that the minute this election is over, the city will go back to the exact same useless, haphazard response it’s been foisting on the public for years, while politicians pat themselves on the back. — Josh Horn
Breed’s words are empty, and the city’s so-called compassion for unhoused people is only activated when it’s convenient for headlines or votes. — Sheela Ivlev
Mayor Breed has been trying to use the homeless crisis for her own personal gains, i.e., for reelection. I am a U.S. Marine Corps vet who had multiple storms of bad luck all roll in around the same time. That resulted in me being homeless and unable to work for the first time in my life. I have never given up trying to find resources and return to being a functioning and productive member of society. But I can tell you that just about every city program, resource and policy must have been given to their interns to come up with. They end up costing the taxpayers an obscene amount of funds and create an environment where nonprofits take advantage of the situation. These nonprofits sweep up and misuse city grants, donations and other funds meant to help the homeless. — Peter Tousignant
It’s extremely impressive what Gavin Newsom and London Breed can accomplish at a critical time like a few months before an election. It’s wonderful to hear about important changes politicians will make, even though they are the ones who have been running the store for years. If there is now a problem to be fixed, it is a problem that was created by the people in office. — Richard E. Myers
Too little, too late. Why did Breed wait until election season to start removing encampments? She has destroyed this city. Anybody but Breed. I’ll vote for Peskin before Breed. Time to start bringing SF back. — Adam Jacobs
It’s about time
Whether it’s because of the coming election or not, I was very, very happy to read Mayor Breed’s article in The Standard. It is firm, clear and compassionate. I want to see much more of this “help those who help themselves” from center-left Democrats. I was not intending to vote for Breed initially, but this past month she’s been doing a very good job of winning me over. — Zachary Henderson
That only took 10 years of painful debate and endless streams of money and a partial emptying of taxpayers from the city to realize what any conservative would have told you to do back at the start. — Tim Dougherty
I’m pleased at the action the Mayor has taken. I wish Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao and officials would take the same initiative. But they don’t care. — Jamila Guess
I just finished reading Mayor Breed’s editorial column in the SF Standard today. I have never been so happy and can’t stop clapping with joy. Finally! I applaud her efforts and support her policies towards clearing homeless encampments. It’s ironic that it took a decision by the “conservative” Supreme Court to give her the legal justification and political will to do so. Maybe she’ll now support reforming Prop. 47, building more jails and prosecuting retail theft. However, I have a feeling that is a bridge too far. — Brian Tokubo
Bravo. Offer help. If people refuse it, they have no right to take over parks, sidewalks and other public spaces. — Josh B.
The mayor’s hardline approach is needed because those bleeding-heart liberal policies in the past only encouraged more homeless to squat here. I have been an SF resident for over 75 years, and I have no problem giving people a temporary helping hand until they get back on their feet. But a lifetime of handouts for the habitually homeless is getting ridiculous and only creates another cog in the homeless industrial complex. There is no incentive for the habitually homeless to make better choices if their basic needs of housing and food are met in perpetuity at taxpayers’ expense. — Judy Lee
I know Mayor Breed is passionate about getting the homeless off our streets. I will never forget seeing her on the steps of the Federal Court of Appeals during the hearing on voluntary versus involuntary homelessness. “The homeless coalition has held San Francisco hostage for a decade. It is time for their reign to end,” Breed shouted while also holding back her tears. What a sad thing that a mayor of a once great and proud city was at the mercy of homeless advocates taking delight in running everything into the ground. The Grants Pass decision of the conservative Trump court has to be acknowledged by sensible persons across the spectrum as a nod to common sense and effective government to promote public health and safety. Our children deserve to walk on our streets or play in our parks without having to traipse over feces and needles or walk in the street to avoid tents on the sidewalk. — Nick Yale
Thank the Lord, someone is finally willing to issue the tough love that’s needed. Mayor Breed’s response is spot-on, and shame on the people who have destroyed my city over the past few decades. — Nina Geneson Otis
‘Simply not competent’
It’s shocking how consistently poor the city’s response has been and continues to be. Many residents think this neglect is intentional. Any competent public official would keep detailed records of incidents and clearly identify chronic trouble spots like this. So all we can conclude is that SF city agencies are simply not competent — or that the city simply doesn’t give a damn. The city’s response is always inadequate reaction as opposed to proactive measures. — John Horn
My wife and I retired to Cow Hollow 12 years ago. We love the city, and especially love the weather. I lived half my life around New York City pre-air conditioners and traveled overheated subways in winter. I can hardly blame homeless people for wanting to live here. We pay a huge rent. We worked many years to get to this moment and pay a high price for it. It seems unfair that many may come here for the same reasons and are helped by the high taxes we pay to enjoy the same pleasures we have. If I were poor and homeless I would beat a path to SF. I’m fine with paying my fair share, but I’m not so fine with paying others’. — Arthur Indenbaum
Why some prefer to remain homeless
The main reason homeless people say “No” to offers of shelter is because the services the city offers are always extremely punitive. I am speaking from firsthand experience. When people sleeping in the cold rain in a soaked blanket turn down help, it is because they have learned from experience that the help is actually designed to make your life even more miserable. The homeless I know would be more than happy to have a nice warm cot in a jail cell with three free meals a day. London Breed and her social workers treat the sick and mentally ill with the utmost contempt. — Daniel Joe O’Connor
Bravo for this opinion piece. My only critique is that City Hall does not get why some prefer to be homeless. From 2009 to 2019, I was homeless and loved every day of it. Sure, there were times when it was less than ideal. But there are many homeless people like me who will not accept housing if it means giving up what they value more — privacy, dignity and respect. — Allen Jones
‘You are dealing with madness’
Today’s homeless, for the most part, fit into two distinct categories. The first are those who cannot afford the outrageous costs of modern rents and mortgages. The other are folks who are broken, people whose lives have failed them for a myriad of reasons. Having once worked in social services, primarily with the mentally ill, I know how impossible it can be communicating with someone who is incapable of hearing you. They reside within their own mental worlds and often are not interested in leaving that anguished comfort. It’s like talking to a wall.
I say this to make the point that many living on the streets are extremely damaged and have made many life decisions to arrive there. Thinking that you can negotiate with entrenched behavioral dysfunction is in itself delusional. One must recognize you are dealing with madness.
That is why the removal of options like staying on the street is the best choice. It might seem inhumane, but somehow, the individuals need to see that what they are doing is self-destructive, that another course of action is necessary. They need to take the initiative to change. Babysitting insanity doesn’t work. The madness instead will only continue until the person’s last breath. That is the brutal reality. — Joseph Blondo
It’s all good if the tent and street sleepers accept what the city is offering, but according to this article, 75% of people living in encampments are not willing to accept shelter. Many are just moving and setting up in other areas of the city, where they continue to camp, disturbing SF residents and businesses. They need help. As in forced help. — Charlotte Moore
‘Sticking our heads in the sand’
What has been missing for a decade-plus is a focus on providing assistance to residents first. So many resources go to those who moved here seeking a sanctuary city and drug tourism. Keeping our native sons and daughters OK benefits the culture, the economy and our sense of community. Isn’t it about time? — Geoff Workman
Everyone gripes about the homeless on the street in San Francisco. The problem is that very few of us acknowledge that we all created the problem by our individual personal choices. Going back 40 years, we individually decided that it was in our personal economic interest to purchase the least expensive items we could. That meant shopping at box stores and chains that produced goods overseas that no U.S.-based manufacturing company could match in price. Also going back 40 years, we put the brakes on housing construction, sticking our heads in the sand that such efforts were creating a supply-demand mess that would end up with escalating prices that made homeowners feel rich while destroying low-priced housing.
The people on the street are the symptoms of the above two problems. There is no real meaningful work for a segment of the population and no hope that they can afford a roof over their heads. Is it any wonder that they turn to something to numb their emotional pain?
We have collectively created this mess. A more accurate term would be a straitjacket. There is no way to get out of it without real pain on everyone’s part. I have little hope that anyone will make the sacrifice. — James Douglas