@DavidCamposSF Disappointed to read your position ... it's more nuanced than "war on poverty." Yes, we need to attack systemic causes ... right now, do we tolerate OD/deaths? Do we tell other people of color in TL to live with violence & crime?
@Twolfrecovery@sfbos Opponents were so ideological ... no acknowledgement of the toll that drugs/crime exact on housed & unhoused alike. Let's see what life in TL is like in 90 days.
@RafaelMandelman Thank you for supporting this 90-day plan for effective action on the drugs and deaths. Lots of work ahead! To those who criticize, nothing is perfect. During the next 90 days, media and metrics will to show if it's working & if people are treated with respect
@MattHaneySF A lot of tweets pose this as an either/or. Safe sleeping is temp for those waiting for housing. Scale up/down per demand. The goal: shelter from the trauma & violence on our streets. A safe place to sleep, stabilize, & get services w/o your stuff being stolen/you attacked.
@NickBastone@drewmcd24@MattHaneySF Hi Nick - many ways to reduce cost: do up-front planning with budgets based on lowest-cost vendor, lower cost land (33 Gough - proposed Nav Ctr, now safe sleep site - has $1.5M/yr lease) etc etc. See BLA report p 17 https://t.co/vS45HG1Q4s
@MattHaneySF Why wouldn't SF offer every person without shelter a safe place to sleep? Safer, healthier than the sidewalk ... during the too-long wait for housing ... when other shelter & housing not available.
Thank you @Portantino for delaying SB 50. In San Francisco we need Affordable housing, not market-rate w/o affordable unless > 10 units. Upzoning 95% of SF negates our plans for density. 69% of SF is multi-unit (see SF Plg's 2018 Housing Inventory.) Let SF plan for SF. Thx!