San Francisco's exasperated mayor said the time for compassion is over as she announced plans to tackle the city's homelessness crisis that has residents fearful for their safety.

Mayor London Breed announced that the city will take a “very aggressive” approach to removing the encampments from the streets that have blighted the City by the Bay for the past four years.

In certain parts of the city, including the troubled Tenderloin district, there is now so much misery and neglect that local businesses can no longer find staff and residents are forced to flee.

The increase in the number of homeless people, which currently stands at around 8,300, has brought with it a host of other related problems: the sidewalks are full of illegal drug dealers, fentanyl users, and violent and intimidating behavior is common near the tent camps.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed said the time for compassion is over when it comes to dealing with the city's homeless crisis, which has led to streets being littered with feces. Homeless people are considered part of the city's struggle with fentanyl problems in San Francisco.

“We have had to evolve from a compassionate city to a responsible city, and I have led the effort to ensure that we approach this issue differently than we have in the past,” Breed said Thursday in a shift in course on the issue.

“We will be very aggressive and forceful in moving the camps, which may even result in criminal consequences,” she said. The “clean-ups” are expected to begin in less than two weeks, once staff have been trained according to the new legal guidelines.

Her comments come just three weeks after the Supreme Court gave cities the authority to evict homeless people from encampments.

“Building more housing won't solve the problem,” Breed said. “Thank God for the Supreme Court decision.”

In December 2022, a federal judge banned the city of San Francisco from clearing homeless tents, even though clearing encampments was not prohibited.

The judge ruled that city officials could no longer evict homeless people from public campsites unless they were offered adequate indoor accommodation.

Click here to resize this module

The city will take a more “aggressive” approach to removing tents and homeless encampments from the streets. San Francisco plans to clear several known homeless encampments starting in August.

Officers were also prohibited from issuing summonses or arresting people who refused to leave their seats.

But the Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling gives the city more power to help with the clearing. Authorities plan to offer shelter and support to those affected.

The case was the most significant to be heard on this issue before the Supreme Court in decades, and came at a time when cities across the country are wrestling with the politically complicated question of how to deal with rising numbers of homeless people and community frustration over related health and safety issues.

“We will continue to lead the way with our services, but we cannot continue to allow people to do whatever they want on the streets of San Francisco, especially when we have a place for them to go,” Breed said.

Conditions have become so bad that residents are afraid to leave their homes and local businesses can no longer hire staff. The area in front of the Federal Building in San Francisco was considered the largest open-air drug market in the entire city.

In San Francisco, homeowners, businesses and local politicians are frustrated by the visible signs of homelessness, which include public streets blocked by tents and trash.

The crime-ridden downtown has seen many stores and restaurants close since the city's drastic decline, although Breed has tried to inflate the statistics, claiming crime rates have dropped in 2023.

In October 2023, it was reported that seven Starbucks stores plan to close as the city continues to struggle with crime, drug use, and homelessness.

In late August 2023, a video was released showing the recently closed Nordstrom flagship store in San Francisco, which was nearly empty after nearly three decades in business.

Homeless people gather downtown, pushing their belongings into shopping carts or sitting on duffel bags, waiting for city services such as shelter, food or clothing, or treatment for mental health and substance abuse problems.

Homeless people gather downtown, pushing their belongings into shopping carts or sitting on duffel bags. Pictured is a homeless person on the sidewalk. City workers clean the streets and remove tents and belongings belonging to homeless people.

Breed says she hopes to exonerate them all, but did not provide specific details on how she plans to achieve that goal. She will likely need the assistance of the police to do so.

The city calculates its homeless numbers every three months, and at the end of the last count in April 2024, a 41 percent decrease was seen compared to July 2023.

In April, 360 tents and structures were counted – a decrease from 610 last summer and 385 in the February count.

This is the lowest value the city has recorded since data collection began in 2018.

Breed said this decline is due to a number of factors, not least police enforcement of laws against camping, even though homeless people have adequate access to emergency shelters.

The city calculates the city's homeless numbers every three months and at the end of the last count in April, a 41 percent decrease was found compared to July 2023. Homeless are considered the city's struggle with fentanyl problems in San Francisco earlier this year. Sidewalks are cleaned in San Francisco's homelessness-plagued Tenderloin neighborhood

A September 2022 ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said cities (generally) violate the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment when they punish homeless people for sleeping on public property or using blankets and pillows to protect themselves from the elements.

But earlier this month, a 9th Circuit panel ordered the injunction blocking the camps' evacuation to be lifted.

City employees must continue to bag and label property collected from homeless people.

This November, Breed faces a tough re-election battle as she faces three serious challengers who accuse her administration of failing to address the problems of homelessness, encampments and the open drug market.

With rising rents and a nationwide shortage of affordable housing, more than 100,000 people in California live on the streets.

Police are allowed to enforce laws against camping if homeless people have reasonable access to shelters. A San Francisco Police Department vehicle drives through a homeless camp being cleared in San Francisco. San Francisco is suffering from rising crime, an emptying downtown area, and residents moving to safer, cheaper areas.

Hawaii, Oregon and Arizona are among other Western states where more homeless people live outside in cars and tents than in shelters, despite billions being spent to reduce homelessness – including San Francisco's annual budget of $672 million.

The average monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco is $3,000.

Advocates say many homeless people would rather stay outdoors than in shelters, where they face the risk of abuse or threats of violence.

Homeless people who have pets, work night shifts, need mental health care, or suffer from substance abuse have a difficult time finding shelter.

The post San Francisco’s ‘very aggressive’ transfer in opposition to homeless as mayor Breed warns the time for compassion is over appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed is facing several early challengers ahead of next year’s mayoral election, all of which are critical of her performance as the city faces a drug overdose epidemic, a growing homeless population, and high crime rates.

The latest threat to her 2024 reelection campaign is Daniel Lurie, an heir to the Levi Strauss clothing fortune. The 46-year-old philanthropist announced his challenge to the Democratic incumbent this week. San Francisco Supervisor Ahsha Safaí filed paperwork in May for the city’s top political job and is considered another prominent challenger.

GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN: WHAT WILL BE OPEN AND WHAT WILL BE CLOSED

While Breed, Lurie, and Safaí are running in the same party, the candidates come from contrasting backgrounds.

Daniel Lurie

Daniel Lurie, philanthropist and Levi Strauss heir, arrives with wife Becca Prowda at the Department of Elections to file paperwork to participate in the mayoral election, in San Francisco, Tuesday, Sept. 26, 2023.

(Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via AP)

Lurie, 46, is the founder and CEO of the nonprofit group Tipping Point Community. He signed paperwork launching his bid to unseat Breed on Tuesday at a rally at the Potrero Hill Neighborhood House.

Speaking to a crowd of reporters, Lurie blasted Breed for failing to solve the city’s threats, such as the fentanyl crisis, staffing shortages in the police department, homelessness, and crime, all problems voters believe are the city’s most pressing challenges.

“This is not a crisis of resources. This is a crisis of leadership,” Lurie said. “We don’t have a mayor who’s challenging the system. We have a mayor who’s entrenched in it.”

“She’s been on the Board of Supervisors or in the City Hall for over a decade. What do we get? No solutions. We get excuses and finger-pointing,” Lurie added.

Under a Lurie administration, he said he’d focus on ending “open-air drug markets” and “the perception that lawlessness” is an acceptable part of the city.

San Francisco is on track to have the highest number of accidental overdose deaths in city history this year, driven by the synthetic opioid fentanyl that is being seized at record levels in the city’s open-air drug markets.

Breed called in Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), a former mayor of San Francisco, to assist with the crisis, calling in the National Guard and partnering with California Highway Patrol to tackle increased drug use. During the first two quarters of 2023, the San Francisco Police Department collected enough fentanyl to result in 30 million lethal doses.

“We have too many people that have been in power for far too long doing things the same way they’ve always been done,” Lurie said in a campaign video. “We have tremendous resources. We have everything at our disposal, and yet our streets are unsafe. We need to end the era of open-air drug dealing.”

Part of Lurie’s plan to curb crime and decrease 911 response times in the city is to boost staffing in the police department. The plan is in response to concern about a dire shortage of police officers.

“With proper staffing levels at SFPD, we will put officers in commercial corridors to deter smash and grab crimes and perform foot patrols in Chinatown so our seniors no longer fear being assaulted as they walk through Portsmouth square,” Lurie’s campaign states.

As of July, San Francisco is about 600 officers short of its recommended staffing levels, which propose 2,182 officers, according to a city-commissioned staffing analysis. However, the latest class of recruits is the largest and most diverse the city has seen in three years, according to Breed’s office. Police department applicants also hit a five-year high.

Lurie pledged to provide enough homeless shelter beds for all San Franciscans who seek one as the city copes with an overflow of homeless encampments.

The city has been embroiled in a lawsuit for more than a year after the Coalition on Homelessness sued the city for clearing homeless encampments. In the September 2022 suit, the organization alleged the city was in violation of state and federal laws that ruled a firm offer of shelter must be issued before citing and arresting people living on the streets. In December, Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu issued an injunction barring the city from clearing encampments in San Francisco. The city has been trying to tackle what “involuntary” homelessness means in court.

On Monday, the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals clarified that Ryu’s preliminary injunction does not apply to residents who refuse shelter or have a bed but choose to stay on the street. “Individuals are not involuntarily homeless if they have declined a specific offer of available shelter or otherwise have access to such shelter,” Breed said in a statement.

Ahsha Safaí 

Supervisor Ahsha Safai during a Board of Supervisors meeting in San Francisco in San Francisco, Tuesday, March 14, 2023.

(AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

The second-term District 11 supervisor, Safaí, 50, filed paperwork in May to challenge Breed in the 2024 election. Safaí started his political career when he won election to the board of supervisors in 2016 against his progressive opponent, Kim Alvarenga, by less than 4 points. Although municipal elections in California are nonpartisan, Safaí was widely viewed as centrist. Safaí sits on the board’s Budget and Appropriations Committee.

Running on responding to the city’s drug crisis, addressing a rise in crime, and improving homeless services, Safaí has been critical of Breed’s performance in those areas, similar to the newest challenger.

Safaí was once a Breed ally, and he has urged unity with the mayor’s office and the board of supervisors.

“I have known London Breed for 23 years. I don’t see this as an affront to her,” Safaí told Mission Local in July when asked about his relationship with Breed.

He blasted Breed for opposing Proposition H, which moved mayoral and other city elections to align with the U.S. presidential election, moving the mayor’s race to 2024 when it passed last November. Supporters of Prop H believe the measure would increase voter turnout.

“If you want to have maybe around 50% of the people elect the most important position in this city, that’s your opinion,” Safaí said. “But I would rather have 75, 76, 77%, the highest voter turnout, determine the outcome of the most important race. And [Breed] was staunchly against that.”

Safaí said to tackle the drug epidemic plaguing San Francisco, he would focus more on the creation of sober living environments, helping people with substance abuse disorders get access to recovery services, according to an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle in May.

The city has spent millions of dollars to end the drug crisis in recent years, but San Francisco has long had a severe shortage of treatment beds. Breed has ramped up efforts in providing treatment options to those struggling with an addiction, making some controversial moves. Starting on July 3, officials launched a disputed new tactic — requiring those who are arrested for drug use or possession for a second time to attend a specialized court offering treatment services.

“I saw the amount of money we spent on homeless services and drug addiction, and things were getting worse, not better,” Safaí said.

Breed launched another initiative last week, ordering people who apply for county adult assistance programs to be screened for substance use disorders, and if they are found to be drug users, they must enter treatment before they can get San Francisco County cash assistance.

The proposal requires approval by the board of supervisors, and President Aaron Peskin, who has been floated as a possible mayoral contender, brushed off Breed’s idea.

“We fund a wide range of services, and we want to help people get the care they need, but under current state law, local government lack tools to compel people into treatment,” Breed said in a statement on Tuesday. “This initiative aims to create more accountability and help get people to accept the treatment and services they need.”

Touching on the police staffing shortage, Safaí plans to fill jobs that are going vacant, including 911 call operators and police officers.

Drugs in Tenderloin and South of Market neighborhoods are flooding in at an alarming rate, with about 154 pounds of fentanyl seized as of July, according to the city’s Tenderloin Police Station.

Safaí sponsored Proposition C, a 2022 November ballot measure that created the Homelessness Oversight Commission, composed of seven commissioners. Despite Breed’s opposition to the measure last year, it passed, and the city set the new oversight commission this year.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Other widely mentioned mayoral contenders include Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting and San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu — both have expressed their disinterest in entering the race. Peskin, supervisor of North Beach and Chinatown, said he has no intention of running.

The Washington Examiner reached out to Lurie and Safaí for an interview.

The post San Francisco Mayor London Breed will get early challengers appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

SAN FRANCISCO – Residents of the city and county of San Francisco with addiction problems who receive cash assistance would be required to undergo treatment to continue receiving payments under a new proposal from Mayor London Breed. 

The proposal, which requires approval by the Board of Supervisors, would require people who apply for County Adult Assistance Programs to undergo screening for substance use disorder and to participate in a treatment program if they’re found to have an addiction, according to a statement Breed sent out Tuesday. 

“We fund a wide range of services, and we want to help people get the care they need but under current state law, local government lack tools to compel people into treatment,” Breed said. “This initiative aims to create more accountability and help get people to accept the treatment and services they need.”   

People who refuse or who “do not successfully engage in treatment” would not be eligible for cash assistance.

Who would this apply to? Specifically, homeless and formerly homeless, single adults, between the ages of 18 and 65, receiving anywhere from $700 to about $800 in cash assistance through San Francisco’s General Assistance program. 

And we’re just talking about the cash payments, not any housing assistance. G.A. is a program that exists in every county in California, and it can legally be tied to drug treatment.

That is what the mayor has proposed.

“Last week alone, 80 people were contacted and touched out on the street, asked if they wanted services, provided treatment on demand,” Breed said Tuesday. “And only one agreed.”

Breed said it is about moving people towards treatment and saving lives, two things San Francisco has struggled with. She also referenced conditions on city streets.

“But no more anything goes without accountability,” the mayor said.

Supervisors Catherine Stefani, Raphael Mandelman and Matt Dorsey all voiced support for the proposal, according to Breed’s announcement. 

Keith Humphreys, an addiction researcher at Stanford University, has been tentatively supportive of some of San Francisco’s efforts to push those in serious trouble towards treatment. But he has questions about this strategy.

“Right now, the city is not able to provide addiction treatment to people who are committing crimes that threaten public safety,” Humphreys told KPIX.

“I guess what I would say is, if I am the mayor, I would prioritize the place where the harm to the public is the greatest and the actual case for intervention is the highest,” Humphreys argued. “Which are people who break the law.”

Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin, however, released a statement Tuesday saying Breed should focus on stopping dealers and open-air drug markets rather than “drug testing people on welfare.”

“If she can’t find the way to prevent several hundred brazen criminals from selling deadly drugs — how does she think she will find the resources to drug test thousands of welfare recipients?” Peskin said in a news release.

My response to Mayor’s pledge this morning to cut off access to welfare without forced drug testing & treatment.

If we somehow have the resources to test thousands of welfare recipients, we have the resources to arrest & charge 500 brazen drug dealers and fight priority crime. pic.twitter.com/sO0isqLUaL

— Aaron Peskin (@AaronPeskin) September 26, 2023

“That’s where the public comes in,” Breed said of the debate. “Putting political pressure on their board of supervisor members to support this. It is definitely gonna be a fight, it won’t be easy. But ultimately, my hope is that the board sees this for what it is, this is a part of the solution to help us get to a better place with a number of people who are dying from drug overdoses in our city.”    

The move comes as California Gov. Gavin Newsom begins the rollout of his controversial new CARE court plan this fall that is projected to cost billions. 

It’s called CARE court because it brings mental health care into the courtroom. Now judges will order people to get help and counties to provide it under a new law that emphasizes accountability and consequences.

A person referred to CARE Court for a severe mental illness will be evaluated. If they have an untreated psychotic disorder, like schizophrenia, a judge can order a mental health treatment plan including medication, therapy and a place to live. 

The governor believes the new civil court system will help thousands get off the streets – and make everyone safer by helping people before they become a danger to themselves or others. 

“Change has its enemies. I get it,” Newsom said during a recent “60 Minutes” interview. “But one thing you cannot argue for, with all due respect to all the critics out there, is the status quo. You can’t. And in the absence of alternatives, What the hell are we gonna do to address this crisis?  

Wilson Walker contributed reporting.

More from CBS News

The post San Francisco Mayor London Breed proposes drug remedy mandate for money help appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

After long sounding the alarm that San Francisco public safety was suffering due to a dire shortage of police officers, Mayor London Breed’s administration is starting to see signs that ranks of city law enforcement might finally be turning a corner. 

The Police Department’s latest class of recruits is the largest the city has seen in three years and job applications have hit a five-year high, according to Breed’s office. Twenty-eight people are enrolled in the most recent Police Academy class that started six weeks ago, compared to just six who are in the previous class that will soon graduate, officials said. 

Breed visited the latest Police Academy class Thursday in Diamond Heights and spoke to them about her personal history growing up in public housing in San Francisco’s Western Addition, where she said her neighborhood did not have “a trusting relationship” with police. But times have changed, she said, recounting how she recently has seen children in the city say they aspire to join the police force someday. 

“That fills me with hope and joy and a lot of pride, because that didn’t happen when I was growing up in San Francisco,” Breed said. “My hope is that we are starting to see change, despite the challenges we need to still deal with. My hope is that the department won’t continue to be politicized, but be supported and elevated.”

Breed told recruits she has seen “a newfound excitement and desire” for police who patrol city neighborhoods and develop close relationships with their communities while “dealing with some of the problematic people” she said have cast San Francisco in an “unfortunate light.”

San Francisco’s police staffing shortage has become a rallying cry among the city’s political moderates who argue that getting more officers on the streets is an essential step to reduce open-air drug markets, lessen property crime and create a more welcoming environment for tourists and office workers downtown. The idea is resisted by some progressives who contend that the city can’t arrest its way out of the drug crisis or other social ills and should instead focus on addressing the root causes of crime. 

The city is still about 600 officers short of the 2,182 recommended in the most recent city-commissioned staffing analysis, according to the Police Department. But Breed’s administration is hoping that its efforts to attract more recruits will help close the gap. 

With Breed’s backing, city supervisors this year agreed to raise police officers’ starting pay and add retention bonuses, a move expected to cost $166.5 million over a three-year period. Supervisors also approved a request from Breed for $25 million to fund police overtime work in the fiscal year that ended in June. Breed on Wednesday signed the latest two-year city budget, which provides for $14.6 billion in annual city spending — including funds to hire 220 more police officers. 

Police Chief Bill Scott told the police recruits Thursday that Breed had “basically put it all on the line for this Police Department.”

“She depends on us, but she believes in us,” Scott said. “Timing is good right now to be a San Francisco police officer. It really is. You guys came in at the right time.”

Scott told reporters that the Police Department had made an effort to speed up its hiring process so it was more competitive with other cities. He also said “a lot of things … are starting to swing in a good direction for policing in the city,” pointing to Breed’s staunch support for his department and the Board of Supervisors’ recent 10-1 approval of a new contract for officers. 

San Francisco leaders still have political disagreements about police staffing.

Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin is seeking to amend the police budget to reduce some high-ranking staff positions and use the savings to hire more rank-and-file-officers. He announced his intent to do so Tuesday and said supervisors could consider the matter when they return from their annual monthlong recess in September. 

Specifically, Peskin is looking to eliminate one of two assistant chief positions and three of eight commander positions. The funds could be used to pay for eight rank-and-file officers, he said. 

Scott pushed back firmly on Peskin’s idea when he appeared at supervisors’ meeting Tuesday. But Peskin doubled down in a fiery Thursday news release, saying he wanted Scott to return to the board and answer questions about why his department had expanded its top command staff roles while leaving some lower-ranking captain positions vacant.

Peskin also pointed to the Police Department’s recent arrest or citing of more than 100 people at the annual Dolores Street “Hill Bomb” skateboarding event — and contrasted it to the constant presence of open-air drug dealing in the heart of the city.

“I want to publicly ask the Chief why he has the resources to conduct mass arrests but can’t use the same coordinated police resources to close down drug supermarkets, address the brazen selling of stolen property on our streets or even have his officers follow up on violent thefts like cell-phone robberies when the alleged thieves are leaving a clearly traceable digital trail,” Peskin said in his news release. “If we can arrest kids with a massive show of police resources, we should be able to arrest scores of drug dealers on the streets of the Tenderloin, the Mission District, and other highly impacted communities. San Franciscans are demanding — and we deserve — answers.”

Scott reiterated his opposition to Peskin’s proposal in remarks to reporters on Thursday. He compared the idea to the defund the police movement that took hold nationally in the wake of George Floyd’s killing by a Minnesota police officer in 2020.

“You can look into that crystal ball called the past and see what dismantling police departments have done to organizations across the country,” Scott said. “This is not the time for that, in my opinion.” 

Scott also said the jobs being targeted by Peskin are filled by people who “are there for a reason.” Moving their work to a lower level could worsen the department’s staffing situation, he said.

“Why would I want to take a job and do twice the work now for less pay, less rank?” Scott said. “We’re gonna have to push the work somewhere. The work doesn’t just disappear.”

Supervisor Matt Dorsey, a close moderate ally of Breed’s and a former police spokesperson, hopes to make a more aggressive move to expand police staffing. He wants voters to decide on a ballot measure in March that would re-establish a minimum staffing level for the Police Department — set at the 2,182 officers recommended in the staffing analysis — and set a goal of reaching that level in the next five years. 

It’s not yet clear if Dorsey has enough support from his fellow supervisors to get them to send that measure to voters. If his colleagues won’t put the measure on the ballot, he could also qualify the measure by launching a signature-gathering campaign. 

Reach J.D. Morris: jd.morris@sfchronicle.com; Twitter: @thejdmorris

The post New San Francisco police hires attain three-year excessive, Mayor Breed says appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

During Thursday’s Bloomberg Technology Summit in San Francisco, San Francisco Mayor London Breed proposed replacing the rapidly derelict San Francisco Center mall entirely with something else, even going so far as to have it torn down for a new soccer stadium .

In recent years, the San Francisco Center shopping mall has experienced a rapid decline. While the mall was valued at $1.2 billion at 100% occupancy in 2016, the decade’s spike in crime, the COVID-19 pandemic, a dramatic drop in foot traffic, and other factors quickly led to that shops left the mall. Last month, a key anchor, Nordstrom, announced that it would exit the mall over the next few months, reducing overall capacity to 55%.

As bad news continued to pour in, the mall’s operator, Westfield, said earlier this month it would stop making payments for the property and ownership would pass to the bank. This prompted one of the mall’s largest tenants, Cinemark, to announce its abrupt closure last week, bringing its occupancy rate below 50%. Since then, other companies have signaled that they may soon exit the mall as well.

San Francisco is on the verge of another large building with low occupancy in the city, and many suggestions have been made in recent weeks about what to do with the property. Some want the mall to continue, while others propose office space, housing, and even converting part of it into a vast recreation area. But when Mayor Breed was asked Thursday what to do with the property, he didn’t opt ​​for the usual conversion of office and residential buildings, instead proposing demolishing the mall and building a stadium there or creating a large laboratory space.

“We can no longer fully rely on downtown retail to limit what’s happening downtown,” Breed said. “You can transform certain spaces. A Westfield shopping center could become something completely different from what it is now. It could be a place where we could even demolish the whole building and build a whole new football stadium. We could create lab space or consider it a new company in a different capacity. Airbnb’s San Francisco headquarters is housed in a former jewelry market.

“Companies need to reinvest in the city community and think even more creatively about ways to use space. Instead of delving into another business’ stories, let’s look at what’s possible. There are many people who might not even shop there. Do I want to come back to the office every five days a week? Of course I would. But will that happen? Probably not. So let’s make some adjustments to do our best to re-imagine what parts of San Francisco can look like.”

The mall

Experts told the Globe on Friday that while a major transformation of the property was potentially feasible, it would have many ramifications for the city and would not guarantee people would use it.

“Closing a mall or converting part of a mall is never easy,” shopping mall planner and consultant Lydia Price-Davis told The Globe Friday. “If we keep the building, there are few conversion success stories. Some malls, particularly in the south, have been saved as large churches move into former anchor stores and the people who go there boost other businesses. But they don’t use all the space either. Keep in mind that department store floor plans are difficult to convert to anything else, especially when center escalators and odd angles are part of the structure. That’s why it’s so difficult to win back another anchor, and department stores aren’t exactly expanding right now. Wal-Mart, Menard’s, Dollar General—they can’t just move in there either.”

“On the demolition side, you have to make sure it’s used. Mayor Breed mentioned that there was a football stadium there. It’s not the worst idea, but you have to have tenants there first. MLS is out of the picture as San Francisco doesn’t have a team and the closest teams to San Jose are already playing in a new stadium. They could try a women’s league team, a minor league, or most likely college teams mixed in with high school and youth leagues, but that means families have to travel to the city to play games. Due to the lot size parking would be a nightmare.”

“Conversion is probably the best option. But even with that, obviously anyone who doesn’t know what to do with a property like this is worrying. San Francisco is emptying right now. You’re getting some tech back, with AI seeing a boost, but nothing big enough to refill those large retail and office spaces in the short term. It is very concerning.”

Further plans on what to do with the mall are expected to be announced soon.

The post Mayor London Breed Proposes San Francisco Centre Mall Be Torn Down For Soccer Stadium appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Welcome to the premiere of WIRED’s new podcast, Have a Nice Future. In this first episode, Gideon Lichfield and Lauren Goode talk to the mayor of San Francisco, London Breed, about how she plans to address the city’s problems, from homelessness to crime to abandoned downtowns, and how the changes she’s proposing could shape not just San Francisco but the cities of the future.

View more

Show Notes

Read more about the city WIRED calls home. Our coverage of San Francisco includes stories about self-driving cars, infrastructure, the tech industry, health care, and homelessness.

Lauren Goode is @LaurenGoode. Gideon Lichfield is @glichfield. Bling the main hotline at @WIRED.

How to Listen

You can always listen to this week’s podcast through the audio player on this page, but if you want to subscribe for free to get every episode, here’s how:

If you’re on an iPhone or iPad, just tap this link, or open the app called Podcasts and search for Have a Nice Future. You can also download an app like Overcast or Pocket Casts and search for Have a Nice Future. We’re on Spotify too.

View more

Transcript

Note: This is an automated transcript, which may contain errors.

Lauren: Energy up.

Gideon: Hi, I’m—oops. Too much energy. Yes.

Lauren: Energy down.

Gideon: Hi, I’m Gideon Lichfield. I’m the editor in chief of WIRED.

Lauren: And I’m Lauren Goode. I’m a senior writer here at WIRED.

Gideon: It’s 30 years ago that WIRED magazine was founded in San Francisco, and that anniversary has made Lauren and me feel quite reflective. 

Lauren: As one gets when they turn 30. We went into the conference rooms, threw a bunch of pillows and blankets on the floor, turned on some Enya. Really got our ’90s vibe on, and we just reminisced. 

Gideon: Ah, Enya. It’s funny to think about what the world of tech looked like 30 years ago. In fact, just a few weeks before the first issue of WIRED was released in January 1993, this guy named Tim Berners-Lee created the very first hypertext pages of a little something he called the World Wide Web.

Archival: It spans the globe like a superhighway. It is called the internet. 

Lauren: People were really excited about the transformative potential of the web. The editors at WIRED certainly were; I found this letter to the editor in an old issue criticizing WIRED for being a little too “orgasmic” about the internet.

Gideon: Orgasmic. 

Lauren: Yeah. And I don’t even think they were talking about specific websites. 

Gideon: Hmm. 

Archival: For years they’ve been saying these things would change. The world would mature from adding machines and typewriters to tools of the human spirit, personal desktop computers, a network of people with unique experiences and expertise connected all over the globe.

Lauren: What could go wrong?

Gideon: So much went wrong in really unexpected ways. I mean, who would’ve predicted QAnon or ISIS recruiting videos, or the ice bucket challenge? Frankly, the future is unpredictable, and that’s what can be really disconcerting 

Lauren: And the pace of innovation has just accelerated so much. Cryptocurrencies, generative AI, the metaverse, so many exciting changes—

Gideon: But also freaky changes– 

Lauren: Changes we can’t seem to pump the brakes on and will have to face one way or another.

Gideon: So we decided to make a show about it. Have a Nice Future.

Lauren: It’s a podcast about how fast things are changing, in good ways and in ways that make us deeply uncomfortable. 

Gideon: Each week we’re going to talk to somebody with a big, audacious idea about the future and ask, is this really the future we want? 

Lauren: We want to ask people what keeps them up at night, and also what keeps them feeling optimistic.

Gideon: And then after we share the interview with you, Lauren and I will discuss how we feel about the future. They’re describing what we think is good about their vision, what we think is troubling, and what we and you can do about it in our own lives. 

Lauren: We’d also like to hear what you think. So send us any questions you have about the future or what’s concerning you. 

Gideon: Or even what makes you optimistic.

Lauren: Yes, that too. 

Gideon: So we decided to kick off this weekly conversation with someone who’s pretty directly shaping mine and Lauren’s future. And ultimately probably yours too. 

Lauren: On today’s episode, we talk to London Breed, the mayor of San Francisco, whose job, as clichéd as it sounds, really is to build a better future for this city. And we have to determine, is this the future we want? 

Gideon: We wanted to interview Mayor Breed because WIRED was founded in San Francisco, of course, and the digital revolution that WIRED was created to cover began in the Bay Area. But tech infiltrates and warps all aspects of life. It changes our social fabric and our urban fabric, and Have a Nice Future is about all of those changes too, not just the bits that are directly brought about by a new piece of code or hardware.

Lauren: San Francisco is a place of contradictions where you have incredible wealth alongside terrible deprivation, and progressive left-wing values juxtaposed with extreme libertarianism. Like a lot of cities around the US right now, San Francisco is facing severe problems with empty downtowns, but also a high cost of living, drug abuse, crime, and homelessness.

Gideon: Right. And just last week, a prominent member of the city’s tech community, Bob Lee, the founder of Cash App, was stabbed early in the morning outside an apartment building in San Francisco and died at the hospital. 

Lauren: We taped this conversation with Mayor Breed before that happened. She has since issued a statement calling the fatal stabbing a horrible tragedy, but it’s certainly another thing that gets added to the portrait of San Francisco as a place that you know is scary and a dangerous place to live.

Gideon: But as you’ll see, the safety of the city’s streets is one of the things she talked about the most. 

Lauren: And we’ll get to all of that with Mayor Breed after the break.

[Break]

Gideon: Mayor Breed, thank you very, very much for joining us on Have a Nice Future. 

Mayor Breed: Thank you. 

Gideon: How is your future going so far?

Mayor Breed: My future is here right now. In my present. It’s going OK. 

Gideon: That’s true for all of us. That is what this show is about; it’s about the fact that our future is here, and we’re all trying to figure it out as we go.

Mayor Breed: Yeah

Gideon: You grew up here. You were raised in public housing by your grandmother. You’ve seen the city change a lot. Some of that change has probably been good, some of it’s been bad. What’s the biggest change that you’ve seen  growing up here?

Mayor Breed: I think the biggest cultural change probably is the decline of the African American community. Even though the community was always considered a smaller part of San Francisco, at its height it was somewhere between 12 and 14 percent. There used to be just more African Americans, more African American businesses, more African American cultural activities and events. And that’s changed. Many of the people who were born and raised here don’t live here anymore. And that’s the thing that I miss the most.

Lauren: What has caused this decline?

Mayor Breed: There are a number of factors, and I can really speak from personal experience. You know, I grew up in public housing, and sadly there was a lot of violence and hopelessness and frustration. And I think some people moved away for better opportunities, as well as to protect their families from the violence. But also, the projects I grew up in were demolished and people were moved, and they were not necessarily moved back. So I think a number of issues played into that decline, including policies and decisions made by this city. 

Lauren: A lot of people looked at tech as the accelerator of changes like that, and your predecessor, Mayor Ed Lee, was known for being pretty friendly to the tech industry. There was even something known as the Twitter tax, where he was giving tax breaks to tech companies that have their offices here, that would bring young talent here driving the economy in the city. Which of his policies do you think were good for the city? Which policies are you actively looking to change in terms of the relationship to tech? How do you reestablish a kind of equilibrium between San Francisco and the tech industry? 

Mayor Breed: Well, I want to make it clear that before tech was a major part of San Francisco, the damage had already been done to the African American community. I think that when the tech industry and some of the policies that Mayor Lee put forward, including a number of tax breaks and incentives, it was at a point where, you know, job opportunities were very challenging for the people of San Francisco.

I think that, moving forward, it was the right thing to do to provide incentives to attract these various industries to revitalize mid-market and to create these extraordinary job opportunities. I think the disconnect was, you know, what we didn’t do as it relates to housing and connecting the existing population of San Francisco to those opportunities.

I think it was a five-year period, for every eight jobs we created, we created one new unit of housing, so the housing market was not supporting the increase in the number of jobs. I also think that there was a real issue around making sure that tech had an obligation to, you know, hire locally in various capacities.

And that we were creating these academies, which we did eventually, to prepare people for the jobs that exist, not just in coding and engineering and some of the things that were being done, but HR, security, receptionists, property managers. All of the layers of things that are needed, and making sure that there was some level of connection to the people who needed these opportunities the most and the ones that were being created.

Lauren: It is in fact a very different city from pre-pandemic. And I say this, I mean, this is my city. I live here. I love San Francisco, and it’s very often that people come to visit here and they say, wow, this is a really beautiful city. They’ve just been hearing about it on the news, and they think it’s like a war zone. And they come here and they realize it really is an incredibly beautiful city, but it does have its real problems.

And from the pandemic, our population is down, our transit revenues are down, our homeless population has gone up. There are a lot of office buildings downtown that are totally empty. I hear your optimism for San Francisco, but it is a very changed city. And I do think it’s a little bit harder to convince people this is the place they should absolutely come if they want to work in tech or build the next big tech company. What does it really look like going forward for you?

Mayor Breed: Well, I don’t agree that it’s been hard to convince people to come here, because they, for whatever reason, are still coming here. I think they’re just doing things differently. They don’t want as much office space. They’re allowing their employees to work remotely, and that is definitely going to change San Francisco in, in so many ways, because you don’t have that same, you know, active population of people in the downtown area moving around and getting on public transportation and going to restaurants and all of that.

But that’s why part of my downtown recovery plan includes more creative options to make the downtown area not a 9 to 5 place. But to look at the evening and the weekends, as you know, possibilities of activities that could happen in the downtown area. The downtown area has been so restrictive in terms of what can be done there. And we have all these crazy codes that have been developed for years that make me insane. I mean, for example, the ability to take some of the office space and convert it into housing shouldn’t be a difficult thing to do, but it is. It is because of the requirements of a yard and open space and all of these things that go with, you know, you have to get conditional use and these kinds of approvals to take an existing building and eliminate those requirements. And my goal in a lot of the legislation I’m proposing is to say, you know what? For these kinds of buildings, let’s just remove it out of the way so that we don’t even have to talk about it in the process of someone wanting to convert. 

Gideon: I actually would love it if you could give us a high-level overview of the pillars of your recovery plan. How are you balancing the things you’re doing to attract business back and attract residents back, and the things that you’re also doing to deal with the issues that people, you know, complain about in San Francisco. Like crime and homelessness.

Mayor Breed: Definitely. So I’ll start with the crime and the homelessness component, because it’s not just about homelessness, it’s about substance use disorder and mental illness and people struggling. Because you know, what we find when we’re out there with our street medicine teams and our street crisis response team and all of these resources that we’re putting into making sure that we have an alternative response to the challenges of our streets other than our police officers. And so we are putting a lot more resources into that to make sure that we’re able to be more aggressive about getting people off the streets and not allow the open-air drug using and some of the things that people are experiencing. 

Lauren: How do you do that? How do you actually get people off the streets and get them the support they need for substance abuse?

Mayor Breed: Well, just so you know, San Francisco was one of the only cities in the region that was able to see a reduction in unsheltered homelessness. Fifteen percent reduction in unsheltered homelessness, and you know, 3 percent …

Gideon: Over what period? Sorry. 

Mayor Breed: So since 2019 until the last point in time count that we did last year, we saw a decent reduction, but that had everything. It was so much work. Of course, it was purchasing hotel buildings. It was providing wraparound supportive services to make sure that people were getting the support and the treatment that they need. It was changing our entire shelter system that was more of a congregate living system and making it more individualized with trailers and cabins, and so just really increasing our capacity significantly to get people off the streets. So we built out our behavioral health beds for those who suffer from mental illness. We’ve built out our shelter system, and then we have these various teams who are out there every day trying to get to the bottom of the challenges that people are facing and get them into housing.

The problem that we have, and where we will need changes to our state law. And I know they’re trying to push for some change to the conservatorship law so that we can deal with those suffering from mental illness, but we need a lot more drastic change so we can be able to force people. Because the only way, in some cases, if people tell us no, which they do, um, if they tell us— 

Gideon: Telling you, no, we don’t want to come off the street …

Mayor Breed: No, we don’t want your help. No, we don’t want your service. No, we’re not going to get up. No, we’re not going to leave. The only way we can deal with a problem like that is, you know, for example, some of our various basic laws to say, you know, you can’t sit and lie on the sidewalk, so you’re gonna have to move. Right? I mean, that’s not a solution, but that’s one of the only resources we have. Or if someone crosses the line and breaks the law, we can make an arrest. And our jails, unfortunately, this is not the place that people want to be used to help people who need treatment, uh, for addiction or substance use disorder or mental illness. And we need changes to state law in order to do a little bit more aggressive force to get people off the streets differently. Um, 

Gideon: You said in an interview last year with The Atlantic, you said that changes that you were proposing as mayor were gonna make a lot of people uncomfortable. And you said, uh, that it was time to be less tolerant of all the bullshit that’s destroyed our city. What did you mean by that? 

Mayor Breed: Well, when I say less tolerant, it’s … I know people have compassion for people who use drugs. You know, I personally have lost a sister to a drug overdose, and I have family members who suffer from addiction. But to say that, well, wait a minute, you know, they have an addiction and we need to, you know, provide them with support and services. I agree with that. But we also cannot let them publicly be out on the streets shooting up or using fentanyl or doing all these things where it has created a lot of chaos, and problematic situations happened in various communities.

When I was growing up, during the crack epidemic, you know, we knew people were on drugs, but the other thing is, in my mind, respect for the community where, when they saw kids or older people walking, like they hid that to a certain extent. It was a thing that wasn’t spoken. And we know people are gonna always have challenges with addiction. I pray it’s not me or I don’t continue to see it happen to the people I care about or anyone else in this city. But the reality is it happens, and we should not just, because we’re empathetic, allow it to just happen on our streets, because we’re saying, well, this person is suffering from addiction and should not, you know, be in prison. I agree, but this is a behavior we can’t tolerate. 

And the other thing is the open air-drug dealing. Being able to publicly, you know, out in the open, deal drugs, sell it to anyone at any given time, and say, well, you know, people are being trafficked and forced to do this, but you know what? They’re still breaking the law. We have to make arrests. We have to hold people accountable. We can’t continue to just say, well, we don’t want to go back to the failed war on drugs. And it’s like, yeah, we don’t. But did any of you who are saying that ever even live in it and understand what it felt and looked like?

This is far worse. And so what we have to do is be a lot more aggressive in how we do things. Yes, if you want help, we get you help. But if the alternative, if you break the law, then community drug court is not gonna be an option for you. So I think we’ve gotten away from accountability, and that’s what I meant. That was what I was frustrated about, about the kids and the families that I’m meeting that are in tears and that are frustrated in the living condition about people I grew up with who have had encounters with the police growing up, who live in the Tenderloin, who have gotten clean and sober and are saying, London, what is going on around here? Like this is worse than what I’ve ever seen it, and we need you to help us. So we have to continue to do whatever we can, as aggressively as we can, to make sure that people don’t feel comfortable doing what they’re doing in the Tenderloin right now. 

Lauren: What other cities do you look to for ideas or inspiration around what San Francisco could you better? I think of a place like Houston, Texas, which has done a tremendous job with homelessness over the past decade or so. Austin, Texas. Which has done a really great job building up its tech community. I’m not saying that those are the best cities to be in. Once again, I’m still partial to San Francisco, but what do you look to, where do you look to? 

Mayor Breed: So let’s just talk about that, because like Houston and Austin, you know what, they have space policies that are not, you know, problematic to the development of those housing units and I think it just makes it a lot easier. But I do look to places like, for example, Amsterdam, right? I love how people in Amsterdam are able to move around on bikes, buses, and different modes of transportation the way that they are. And just with how the bike infrastructure exists there. And I want to see San Francisco become more user-friendly for people to move around using different modes of transportation and less reliant upon cars.

Lauren: But what’s actually preventing us from doing that? I mean, put this in the context of we have a huge budget. San Francisco has a huge budget. I had the opportunity to hear your comptroller, Ben Rosenfeld, speak recently at Manny’s, a wonderful local community center, and hear a little bit about the breakdown of the city budget. And I think other people look at us and say, wow, $14 billion. That’s a budget that’s bigger than a lot of states and some entire countries. Uh, yet we have the problems that we have. Yet you are here, Mayor Breed, telling us that you have these ideas and ideals for what a city can be. Why can’t we do that? What is stopping us? 

Mayor Breed: So I can spend this whole podcast talking just about the breakdown of the budget, because you have to keep in mind, San Francisco’s a city and a county,  We have our own airport. That’s a part of the budget—  

Lauren: Our discretionary budget is much smaller.

Mayor Breed: Very, yeah. It’s on a whole other level. But like, you know, the airport dollars stay with the airport, the public utilities commission with the sewer and the treatment plant, and the water and electricity—like all of those things are a part of this larger budget. So yes, the discretionary part is a lot more difficult.

Then there are all these different carve-outs in the budget where this amount goes to children and families. This amount goes to this, this amount goes to that. It’s not an excuse for why we can’t. Because we were able to, you know, since I’ve become mayor, add over 22 miles of protected bike lanes. We did so aggressively. But it’s not as easy as saying, OK, here’s the money. You can’t just—all of a sudden someone has access to their garage and then the next day they wake up and they no longer have access to their garage. So doing things like this requires outreach. It requires a lot of work.

But I think in comparison to how we used to be when I grew up, you know, you didn’t ride a bike to get around the city. You just did not. You got on the bus or you walked, and if you were lucky enough to have access to a vehicle, you were in a vehicle. But, you know, now the culture of San Francisco has shifted, and I think we’re gonna get there.

Lauren: What keeps you up at night? 

Mayor Breed: You know, I actually sleep really good at night. 

Gideon: What’s your secret? 

Mayor Breed: I don’t know what it is, but as soon as I hit the pillow, it’s like I’m done. Because I gotta get my rest. If not, I’m gonna be grouchier than I already am.  

Lauren: Metaphorically speaking, what keeps you up at night? 

Mayor Breed: I think the thing that I think about most, uh, is really the challenges around the drug use and the drug dealing. You know, my goal is I want to see it improve. I want to see it turn around, and I want people to feel good about our city. 

Gideon: And what, to take the opposite line, in what way does San Francisco reflect what the city of the future could be? What do you see as the hopeful side of that?

Mayor Breed: Well, I’m very hopeful because, you know, there have been political changes that have led to better results, uh, that we can produce for the city. I think, you know, the future of the city … 

Gideon: When you say “political changes” …

Mayor Breed: Well, we have a new district attorney who’s actually prosecuting people for crime. We have new members of the Board of Supervisors who are supporting reasonable policies that make sense. I think the people of this city want us to get back to basics. They want reliable transportation. They want clean and safe streets. They want to be able to make a decent living, hopefully purchase a home and raise their families and send them to school. To me that’s the basics. AndI’m hopeful because I feel like the city is finally getting back to that. And the fact is, if we can get back to the basics and deliver for the people of the San Francisco, we can make this city so much better. And I am hopeful about that. I’m hopeful about the future. I’m hopeful about the city we are right now, but the, the city that we can definitely become by improving upon what we’re already doing.

Lauren: But how do you build San Francisco back in a way that we’re not perpetuating inequities? And, by the way, we think about this a lot at WIRED—even right now, there’s a lot of conversation happening about generative AI and how amazing it is. But you talk to researchers and economists and they say, is this only going to further the technological divide? Deepen the gaps, right? It’s going to make the top 1 percent wealthier, and the bottom 90 percent are not going to be able to meet, you know, any kind of wealth goals. Like, how do we ensure that San Francisco, if it is built back up, we’re doing it in such a way that it’s not just, you know, the very, very wealthy who have a comfortable place to live and everyone else struggles to live. 

Mayor Breed: Yeah. And that’s gonna continue to be a struggle because people go into business because they want to make money and they want to be wealthy, and so you’re not gonna be able to get away from folks who choose to do that. But what I will say is that companies are becoming more intentional about supporting the surrounding community and not just flying in the next new talent or what have you. The talent is right here, and so that’s part of it. But also, when we look at a lot of the disparities around homelessness, around violence, and around a number of other issues, and especially one of the populations that’s declined most significantly, where are we going wrong?

We know what the problems are, so how do we make those investments? We’ve given down-payment assistance for people to buy homes, which has been extraordinary. I met these families and you know, in tears about the ability, never thinking they could buy a home in San Francisco in their lives. Thirty-four new brick-and-mortar businesses that are started that we helped with the down payment for, uh, the rent and uh, the build-out, so that they can get started, because they’re not necessarily getting a lot of the capital, uh, to get those businesses started.

And so I’m really proud of the investments the city’s making, and also being intentional about getting more companies to be more open to supporting the community in a way that’s gonna help bring people along. Rather than doing something to the city, it’s doing something for the city. And I think we’re gonna get there.

Gideon: You talked about how you’re excited for what the city could become. So what does that look like 20, 30 years from now? What’s your ideal of how San Francisco looks different from what it is now?

Mayor Breed: Well, it will look different because we’ll have more housing in a lot of underutilized properties on the west side of town where you’re not seeing a lot of places being built. We’ll have a great public transportation system where it’s reliable and people decide they want to use it. We’ll have more protected bike lanes. We’ll have, like, no homeless ever. Like, it’s just, as soon as you’re on the street, we’re picking you up and taking you into shelter, into a situation, and we’re able to, you know, clear out our streets, keep them clean, you know, keep people safe and sober. And make sure that if people want an opportunity to take care of themselves, they get one. But more importantly, the city changes for the better, where people just walk down the street and say, Hmm, there’s something different about San Francisco and I’m loving it.

Lauren: And where are you in that timeline?

Mayor Breed: I hope I’m still mayor in that timeline. I want to see it happen yesterday, but that’s what I fight for every single day. Because as we said earlier, I grew up born and raised in poverty, and when I think about just my own family and the challenges we experienced—having a sister who died from a drug overdose, having a brother who’s still incarcerated—that could have easily been me, and I’m mayor of San Francisco. And so for me, I feel really honored and that this is really a privilege that I can’t take lightly every day I show up to work. It has to be about making sure that people don’t grow up in the same kinds of conditions and challenges, and knowing what’s possible when San Francisco gets it right. 

Gideon: Well, Mayor Breed, thank you so, so much.

Lauren: Thank you so much.

Mayor Breed: Thank you.

[Break]

Gideon: So Lauren, as a resident of San Francisco, how do you feel about the city after we talked to the mayor? 

Lauren: Well, it was hard to feel pessimistic after the interview, because when we walked out of the mayor’s office that day, we walked into this incredible atrium at City Hall and there was a wedding happening right then and there. Like there was one wedding happening when I first walked into the building that morning, and then we saw someone walking down the aisle as we came out of the office, and it’s really hard not to feel optimistic when you’re witnessing that sort of event. How did you feel about it?

Gideon: You know, the thing that struck me was how animated she got when she talked about San Francisco, comparing it with Amsterdam—as you know, a very European city with bike lanes and buses and people in the streets in the evenings. And for just a moment, I had this glimpse of a city in which all of the problems of homelessness and drug abuse and poor housing have been cleared up. It is rather unique among American cities and could really be kind of a paradise. 

Lauren: San Francisco has gotten a lot better about having car-free spaces in bike lanes, which Mayor Breed talked about.But yeah, I thought it was really interesting how when we asked her what other cities she looks to for inspirations that she actually mentioned a European city instead of another US city. 

Gideon: Yeah, that was striking. What was also interesting was that she kind of skirted the questions that we were asking her about the tech industry and how to bring it back. She talked about, you know, making things easier for businesses, getting rid of some of the restrictions on permitting, for instance, but a lot of the things we were asking her about tech, she was bringing it back to the social issues, to the homelessness and the drugs, which she seems really impassioned about

Lauren: Right? Yeah. She seemed to really thread the needle on the tech sector’s direct impact on the city, both good and bad. She’s absolutely correct that the African American population has been in decline since the 1970s. It’s the Black community that sees the most consistent declines in the population in every census, and there are certainly discriminatory policies that have led to this. But you know, longtime San Franciscans will often say that it’s tech that has driven the city’s prices up and created a monoculture in recent years. Like it’s, you know, in more recent times it’s hard not to look at issues like the rising cost of housing and at least ask the question of whether there’s a correlation between that and the rise of the tech sector.

Gideon: Yes. That’s when I think she was being at her most political. As you say, she was threading the needle. She wanted to send a signal that the tech industry was welcome and wasn’t being blamed for the social problems the city has. But at the same time, it didn’t seem to be uppermost in her mind as the thing that she wanted to work on.

Lauren: I would also like to have asked her more about safe consumption sites, which are places where people who have an addiction can get a hold of drugs or bring their own and use them with safety personnel around, which is part of a broader effort in harm reduction, right? The idea being that this would prevent overdoses. It’s clear that drug abuse is a topic she feels strongly about. It is such a complicated issue though. Mayor Breed has said before she supports safe consumption sites, but there have been legal restrictions around them in San Francisco, and more recently she has said she would support a nonprofit model that might allow safe consumption, which is actually an idea borrowed from New York City. But overall, that’s just one solution to what is clearly a much bigger problem. 

Gideon: I think the fact that she talks about this stuff so much reflects not just her own concern with it but also an awareness that around the country and around the world, this is a thing that people look at San Francisco and see … If you go to tech conferences or look at tech Twitter, people are talking about how the city has been overtaken by the homeless and there is drug use on the streets and there are cars being broken into all the time. It feels almost like there are these two completely different San Franciscos that exist in people’s heads. One is this beautiful city, and one is almost the land of the walking dead. Right? 

Lauren: People who refer to these folks in the streets as zombies, I think, are sometimes forgetting that they’re human beings too, and that it’s going to take a huge collective effort to solve some of these problems. I’m not sure I left that conversation feeling like Mayor Breed knew exactly how to fix these things—because in fairness, what if the systems at play are bigger than anything she can do at the city level? What if we need a much broader conversation around money and taxes and housing and the role of government in providing safety nets and just what it means to be safe in a community and also care for your neighbors. I don’t know, Gideon, did you walk away from the conversation feeling as though Mayor Breed had proposed some solutions you felt good about? 

Gideon: You know, it was striking to me that she’s proposing pretty hard-line solutions. In some ways, she’s talking about using the law and all sorts of other measures to essentially force people off the streets. And yet she doesn’t come at this with a lack of empathy. You know, she talks about having lost her sister to a drug overdose, having a brother who’s incarcerated. But all in all, yes, I feel like she’s making quite a hard push. 

Lauren: Yeah, she is taking a firm approach, and the thing is, San Francisco isn’t unique in dealing with a lot of these issues. Homelessness is spiking all across the country. Drug abuse is too, and few people have really come up with a good solution. So a lot of other cities will be watching and learning from Breed’s successes and mistakes. 

Gideon: And not just on drugs and homelessness. Right? 

Lauren: Right. She mentioned the empty downtowns and the restrictive zoning laws that she wants to change to deal with the rising cost of living. And that’s yet again, a problem that we’re dealing with all over. So if she finds that she can turn some of these empty office buildings into apartments, that would be huge, right? So, Gideon, are you going to stake out an empty floor of the Salesforce Tower for yourself?

Gideon: Sure, if I can get one with south-facing windows. I have to say, I found Mayor Breed’s vision of the city pretty compelling. 

Lauren: You know what else is pretty compelling? Some of the other guests we’re gonna be having on this podcast. 

Gideon: Yes. We’re gonna be talking to some exciting people in the next few weeks. We’ve got Max Levchin over at Affirm on the future of paying for things, but also biohacking and socialism, and so much more.

Lauren: We’ve got a conversation with a futurist about how you should prepare your kids for climate change by basically scaring the bejesus out of them. 

Gideon: And we’ll hear from the CEO of Slack about how to disconnect from your job when the future of work is increasingly always-on, thanks in part to things like Slack.

Lauren: And we want to hear who you’d like to hear from. You can email us at nicefuture@WIRED.com. Tell us what you’re worried about, what excites you, any question at all you have about the future, and we’ll ask our guests. 

Gideon: Have a Nice Future is hosted by me, Gideon Lichfield.

Lauren: And me, Lauren Goode. 

Gideon: If you like the show, please leave us a review wherever you get your podcasts and follow us to hear more episodes. 

Lauren: Have a Nice Future is a production of Condé Nast Entertainment. Danielle Hewitt and Lena Richards from Prologue Projects Produce the show. 

Gideon: See you back here next Wednesday, and until then, have a nice future.

The post San Francisco Mayor London Breed on the Metropolis’s Troubles—and Hopes appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Sewage seeps into rooms. Deteriorated tubes. Fifteen broken bathrooms. A staircase that had reached the “end of its life”. When Mayor of London Breed announced $5 million to repair San Francisco’s crumbling housing stock for the homeless last year, the requests started pouring in.

Overall, the nonprofits that run permanent housing programs in the city requested $21.6 million worth of repairs and renovations — more than four times the amount Breed has committed in the current two-year budget — according to The public records chronicle . And yet, more than six months after the funds were made available, no money was spent to address safety and quality of life issues in 82 buildings.

The lack of action leaves thousands of formerly homeless renters, often struggling with mental and physical disabilities to endure substandard living conditions. It also notes that despite spending more than $600 million a year on homelessness, the needs often far outweigh the city’s resources. Difficult decisions about how to spend the city’s funds will only worsen as San Francisco grapples with projected deficits in the years to come.

Del Seymour, a longtime resident of Tenderloin and a member of the town’s Local Homelessness Coordinating Board, said, “This is such an embarrassment for the city and such an embarrassment for the state that we still have people in such degraded conditions.”

Gabrielle Lurie, Contributor / The Chronicle

“This should be one of the most important initiatives,” said Del Seymour, a member of the city’s Local Homelessness Coordinating Board. “This is such an embarrassment for the city and such an embarrassment for the state that we still have people in such degraded conditions.”

Breed pledged the $5 million investment last May in response to a Chronicle investigation that found residents at city-funded single-room occupancy hotels (SROs) often faced appalling conditions. Reporters found that many of the century-old hotels that form the backbone of the city’s permanent housing system are overrun by pest infestations, plumbing problems, chronically broken elevators and crime.

Since taking office, Breed has focused her attention and resources on buying and creating new housing for people currently living on the streets. More than 3,000 new units have been opened or signed since 2018. At the same time, however, The Chronicle found its administration has long neglected the thousands of people languishing in seedy hotels.

San Francisco Mayor London Breed said last year that $5 million was earmarked for repairing run-down SRO hotels. But none of the money has been spent yet.

Yalonda M. James / The Chronicle

Jeff Cretan, a spokesman for the mayor, said it’s an ongoing “compromise” in deciding where to allocate resources.

“We need safe and habitable places to live, and that’s important,” Cretan said. “But it’s also about making sure people can live indoors.”

The money was officially available in late July when the mayor signed off on the city’s two-year budget.

Seventy percent of funding requests came from buildings owned by not-for-profit housing providers, who say limited rental income and insufficient public support can make it difficult to keep track of maintenance.

The remaining 30% came from residential hotels that non-profit organizations rent from private landlords. Dubbed a master lease, the arrangement can be a boon to building owners, who can be paid more than $1 million each year while shifting the ongoing costs of operating and maintaining their properties to nonprofit organizations. Owners are usually responsible for major structural improvements to their buildings, such as: B. the replacement of the roof or the modernization of elevators.

But if the landlord doesn’t cooperate or falls short, the non-profit organizations often have to rely on the help of the city or private donors.

Breed’s pledge of $5 million in capital repairs was an attempt to fill some of the gaps.

Community Forward SF requested $165,000 from the city for much-needed repairs to the elevator and plumbing system at the Coronado Hotel in the Tenderloin, according to the list of requests to the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing obtained by The Chronicle.

Sammie Rayner, chief operating officer at Community Forward SF, said the elevator has since been repaired with other funds the group received from the city. “It is a challenge; We all inherited these buildings that aren’t in the best condition,” Rayner said. “These investments are really critical for us to serve our tenants.”

At the Mission Hotel, San Francisco’s largest SRO with 240 units, the Tenderloin Housing Clinic requested $609,000 to renovate several shower rooms. Last year, after a tenant complained to the building inspectorate about “dirty conditions” in the shared bathrooms, inspectors confirmed peeling paint, broken showerheads, malfunctioning locks, graffiti, a leaky ceiling and missing tiles in some facilities.

At the Senator Hotel, non-profit organization HomeRise asked for $1 million to “address significant structural needs, including the replacement of an “underperforming and aging boiler” and a “replacement roof that will ensure the long-term integrity of the building.” The SRO was subpoenaed over the past year for multiple violations of the Housing Code, building inspector records show, including water damage in rooms, holes in the ceiling and windows in “various states of disrepair”.

Reality House West, the non-profit organization that owns and operates the Cadillac Hotel, requested $250,000 for unspecified “building improvements.” The residential hotel is home to many formerly homeless seniors and people with disabilities, but public records show that its elevator frequently breaks down, sometimes trapping residents on the upper floors. In the past year alone, the fire service responded to 15 calls about people being stuck in the broken elevator.

Reality House West executive director Kathy Looper has not responded to multiple emails from The Chronicle for more specific information about the funding application.

Meanwhile, Episcopal Community Services, one of the largest sustained providers of supportive housing, asked for more money than anyone else — $5.9 million for upgrades at 11 hotels and apartment buildings. Episcopal’s chief program officer Chris Callandrillo said the nonprofit’s requests are an “abbreviated picture” of what’s actually needed.

He said the funding shows the mayor takes the problem seriously, but the $5 million provided by Breed isn’t enough “to solve all the problems in the SROs.”

Some requests seemed less urgent, such as $15,000 from Mercy Housing to install bike racks in each unit of the newly built Tahanan.

Emily Cohen, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homelessness and Assisted Housing, said the department must carefully consider which requests to grant — especially as the city braces for a projected deficit of $728 million over the next two fiscal years, as tax revenues fall in a slow recovery from the pandemic.

Cohen added that improving the quality of buildings is a “priority,” but given the bleak fiscal outlook, the department also needs to sharpen its focus on getting more people off the streets. At the same time, she said, the department is working with private landlords to hold them accountable for the repairs they are responsible for making.

“When demand exceeds what is available, we need to have a fair process for allocating the resources,” she said, adding that she expects funding decisions to be made within the next few months, with a view to the biggest resource impact the well-being of the tenants.

Joe Smith, who is staying at the Cadillac Hotel, said he would welcome the extra money to fix his SRO. While the on-site consultants have helped him regain some stability, the chronic maintenance issues have discouraged him. Mice are eating his food and clothes, he said, and the floor in his room is starting to peel off

“When I finally get somewhere that I can stay and live comfortably, maybe I can move on and get my life together, save some money, go home and see my kids,” Smith said. “But it’s quite difficult to buy cockroach spray or duct tape to tape the floor together. It’s nerve wracking. It’s very depressing right now.”

Trisha Thadani and Joaquin Palomino are contributors to the San Francisco Chronicle. Email: tthadani@sfchronicle.com, jpalomino@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @TrishaThadani, @JoaquinPalomino

The post London Breed pledged $5M to repair SF homeless housing, however no progress appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Last night, the Coalition on Homelessness and seven individual plaintiffs filed suits against the City and County of San Francisco and the Mayor of London Breed for their efforts to criminalize homelessness through a series of brutal police practices that violate the constitutional rights of homeless people in San Francisco injure. Plaintiffs are also seeking an injunction to stop these practices in an emergency. The plaintiffs are represented by the San Francisco Bay Area Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, and the global law firm Latham & Watkins LLP.

For years, San Francisco has claimed it is taking steps to address the city’s homelessness crisis. But in fact, the city is forcing homeless people out of sight – destroying their vital belongings and citing and arresting them for sleeping in public when they don’t have shelter. San Francisco has more laws criminalizing homelessness than any other place in California, and possibly America. This regressive policy of mass incarceration only perpetuates San Francisco’s homelessness crisis and scapegoats the homeless for the city’s egregious failure to support affordable housing for San Francisco residents.

San Francisco lacks – and always has lacked – adequate, affordable housing and housing for thousands of homeless San Franciscos. San Francisco’s threats, subpoenas, arrests, and removal of homeless residents from public spaces therefore violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. The city also engages in a practice of illegally confiscating and destroying the personal property of unaccommodated residents in violation of the Fourth Amendment. These practices are helping San Francisco claim that it’s solving the homeless crisis — when in fact it just swept it under the rug.

San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is one of pricelessness. When long-established residents can no longer afford their apartments, they are forced onto the streets. San Francisco politicians have understood this for years, but they have not acted. Instead, the city has consistently relied on tough crime policies to respond to homelessness, rather than addressing the root cause of the problem: the clear lack of sustainable affordable housing.

It’s immoral, cruel, costly and ultimately counterproductive – not to mention unconstitutional. The city knows this because it consistently violates its own policies, which purport to require a humane, service-oriented approach to the homeless crisis. The reality is that homeless San Franciscans are waking up to find their survival goods being confiscated and destroyed as they face criminal penalties if they sleep outdoors, even though the city offers little to homeless San Francisco residents in terms of shelter, housing and services until it has nothing to offer. This lawsuit combines vast amounts of public data with eyewitness accounts to expose the city’s unlawful behavior that is making it nearly impossible for thousands of San Francisco residents to emerge from homelessness.

Those affected by homelessness in San Francisco are disproportionately people of color due to decades of discrimination in housing, education, healthcare, and the criminal justice system. Today, for example, blacks make up 6% of San Francisco’s total population, but make up 37% of the city’s homeless. Black renters in San Francisco still face some of the worst housing discrimination in the country. This targeted exclusion has only exacerbated the homelessness crisis for people of color.

San Franciscans deserve real homelessness solutions. This begins and ends with the city actually investing in affordable housing. This lawsuit seeks to hold the city accountable for its unconstitutional attack on unhoused San Franciscans. The city can punish unaccommodated people for a housing shortage it causes.

Customer testimonials:

Plaintiff Nathaniel Vaughn, a lifelong San Franciscan who was recently homeless, muses, “We don’t deserve to be treated like criminals and have our belongings thrown in the trash when we are most vulnerable.”

Plaintiff Toro Castaño points to the impact this is having on homeless people: “The city’s feuds [are] a dehumanizing disruption to that little bit of stability I was trying to build for myself during one of the hardest times of my life.”

Plaintiff Sarah Cronk says the same thing: “We’re just trying to create and build as much life for ourselves as we can – both with dignity and safety. The city makes that impossible for us.”

Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness: “San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is its affordable housing crisis. Instead of investing in sustainable, affordable housing, the city has spent millions of dollars ridding our neighborhoods of visible signs of homelessness. Punitive approaches exacerbate homelessness by making it more difficult for people to access already limited services, find work and secure stable housing.”

Attorney Statements:

“The city is using homeless residents as scapegoats for a crisis of economic and racial justice that it helped create. San Francisco should fight to end homelessness. But the only real solution to San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is housing. Instead of solving homelessness, the city has invested in detention measures that are making the crisis worse. Not only is this unconstitutional, it’s just plain bad politics. We should expect much better from our political leaders.” – Zal Shroff, Senior Staff Attorney, Bay Area Attorneys’ Committee on Civil Rights

“Racism is embedded in the criminalization of homelessness in San Francisco as people of color are disproportionately targeted by anti-homelessness ordinances. The current system is grievance-oriented, allowing housed residents to dictate traumatizing enforcement against unhoused people trying to live in whiter, gentrifying neighborhoods. This suggests the city is doing more to appease wealthy homeowners than supporting the health and well-being of the most vulnerable with real opportunities from homelessness. Through the lawsuit, we seek to expose the city’s illusory shelter opportunities and end the racist consequences of criminalization.” – John Do, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

The post Metropolis of San Francisco & Mayor London Breed Sued for Harassing Unhoused San Franciscans, Violating Civil Rights to Cowl Up the Metropolis’s Inexpensive Housing Failures appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

In an interview with Bloomberg News earlier this week, San Francisco Mayor London Breed commented on the lack of remote workers returning to offices across the city, saying that the low office vacancy rates are prompting her to attempt to attract new types of businesses to the downtown area .

“Life as we knew it before the pandemic is not going to go back,” Breed told Bloomberg News. “This whole work-from-home thing is here to stay.”

The outlet noted that attitude represents a shift for breed, who tried a myriad of tactics to bring workers back. The report said office vacancies in San Francisco struck a record high of 25.5% in the third quarter, and return-to-office rates have hovered around 40% of pre-pandemic levels, representing one of the lowest rates among large metros areas in the U.S

Breed told Bloomberg News that the number of city employees who have returned to work is smaller than expected.

“We thought people would miss working around other people, but they do not,” she said.

The remote work policies of tech companies are part of the problem, Breed said. She pointed to Salesforce, the large software company headed in part by Marc Benioff, as an example. Salesforce is the city’s largest private employer, and its offices occupy San Francisco’s tallest office tower.

“[Marc is] very supportive of the city, continues to contribute that support to schools and to other great causes, but the building is empty, and that’s a real problem,” Breed said. “Ultimately I can’t force or mandate, right? These companies are making the decisions that they believe that are in their best interests.”

Breed’s point is that a lack of workers in the office hurts the city’s economy. Empty buildings depress property values, which affects the amount the city makes in property tax revenue. Workers are also using public transportation at lower rates, and are spending less on goods at local businesses since they spend more time inside their homes.

Without returning employees to in-person work at higher rates, Breed said she’ll be attempting to coax businesses in growing industries, such as biotechnology and green technology, to fill empty office space.

You can read the entire Bloomberg News article here.

The post San Francisco Mayor London Breed laments ‘this entire work-from-home factor’ appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

Late yesterday, the Coalition on Homelessness and seven individual plaintiffs filed suit against the City and County of San Francisco and Mayor London Breed for their efforts to criminalize homelessness through an array of brutal policing practices that violate the constitutional rights of unhoused San Franciscans. The plaintiffs are also seeking a preliminary injunction to stop these practices on an emergency basis. Plaintiffs are represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area and the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, as well as the global law firm Latham & Watkins LLP.

For years, San Francisco has claimed that it is taking steps to address the City’s homelessness crisis. But in fact, the City is forcing unhoused people out of sight—destroying their survival belongings and citing and arresting them for sleeping in public when they have no shelter to go to. San Francisco has more laws penalizing homelessness than any other place in California, and possibly America. These regressive mass incarceration era policies only perpetuate San Francisco’s homelessness crisis and scapegoat unhoused people for the City’s egregious failure to support affordable housing for San Francisco residents.

San Francisco lacks—and has always lacked—adequate affordable housing and shelter for thousands of unhoused San Franciscans. San Francisco’s threats, citations, arrests, and removal of unhoused residents from public spaces therefore violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The City is also engaged in a practice of illegally seizing and destroying the personal belongings of unhoused residents in violation of the Fourth Amendment. These practices help San Francisco claim that it is solving the homelessness crisis—when it has actually just swept it under the rug.

San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is one of unaffordability. When longstanding residents can no longer afford to stay in their homes, they are forced out onto the street. San Francisco’s politicians have understood this for years, but they have failed to act. Instead, the City has consistently relied on tough-on-crime policies to respond to homelessness instead of addressing the root cause of the problem: the clear lack of permanent affordable housing.

This is immoral, cruel, costly, and ultimately counterproductive—not to mention unconstitutional. The City knows this because it constantly violates its own policies that purport to require a humane, services-first approach to the homelessness crisis. The reality is that unhoused San Franciscans wake up to find their survival belongings seized and destroyed as they face criminal penalties for sleeping outside even though the city has little to nothing to offer San Francisco’s unhoused residents in terms of shelter, housing, and services. This lawsuit combines massive amounts of public data with eyewitness accounts to expose the City’s unlawful conduct, which makes it almost impossible for the thousands of affected San Franciscans to exit homelessness.

Those experiencing homelessness in San Francisco are disproportionately people of color due to decades of discrimination in housing, education, healthcare and the criminal justice system. Today, for example, Black people comprise 6% of San Francisco’s general population but make up 37% of the City’s unhoused population. Black renters in San Francisco still face some of the worst housing discrimination anywhere in the country. That targeted exclusion has only exacerbated the homelessness crisis for people of color.

San Franciscans deserve real solutions to homelessness. That starts and ends with the City actually investing in affordable housing. This lawsuit seeks to hold the City to account for its unconstitutional attack on unhoused San Franciscans. The City cannot punish unhoused people for a housing crisis it created.

Client statements:

Plaintiff Nathaniel Vaughn, a life-long San Franciscan who recently became unhoused, reflects: “We do not deserve to be treated like criminals and to have our belongings thrown in the trash when we are at our most vulnerable.”

Plaintiff Toro Castaño notes the impact this has on unhoused people: “The City’s sweeps [are] a dehumanizing disruption to the small ounce of stability that I was trying to build for myself during one of the hardest times of my life.”

Plaintiff Sarah Cronk says the same: “We are just trying to scrape by and build as much of a life for ourselves as possible—with both dignity and safety. The City makes that impossible for us.”

Jennifer Friedenbach, Executive Director of the Coalition on Homelessness: “San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is its affordable housing crisis. Instead of investing in permanent affordable housing, the city has spent millions of dollars to rid our neighborhoods of visible signs of homelessness. Punitive approaches make homelessness worse, as it only makes it harder for people to access already limited services, find employment and secure stable housing.”

Attorney statements:

“The City is using unhoused residents as the scapegoats for a crisis of economic and racial justice that it helped to create. San Francisco should fight to end homelessness. But the only real solution to San Francisco’s homelessness crisis is housing. Instead of solving homelessness, the City has invested in carceral policies that make the crisis worse. That’s not only unconstitutional, it’s also just bad policy. We should expect better far better from our political leaders.” – Zal Shroff, Senior Staff Attorney, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the Bay Area

“Racism is embedded in the criminalization of homelessness in San Francisco as people of color are disproportionately targeted by anti-homeless ordinances. The current system is complaint-driven, allowing housed residents to dictate traumatizing enforcement against unhoused people who attempt to live in whiter, gentrifying neighborhoods. This suggests that the City is doing more to appear wealthy homeowners than it is to support the health and wellbeing of the most vulnerable with real opportunities out of homelessness. Through the lawsuit, we aim to lay bare the City’s illusory shelter options and end the racist results that criminalization produces.” – John Do, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU of Northern California

The post Metropolis of San Francisco & Mayor London Breed Sued for Harassing Unhoused San Franciscans, Violating Civil Rights to Cowl Up the Metropolis’s Inexpensive Housing Failures appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.