“Collins notes that there are, presently, no treatment programs available and not even enough workers to process the Medi-Cal benefits for aid recipients who want to be in treatment — let alone people who do not seek treatment and are compelled into it. There are no earmarks in Proposition F for additional dollars with which to fund an expansion.”

Argue all you want about Breed, the bottom line is this proposition is ALL FOR SHOW as there are simply not enough beds or clinicians to give the mandated care.

In reply to Joe Eskenazi.

He doesn’t care, he just needs to get of his chest how angry he is his tax money might help someone else.

In reply to David Boyd.

David — 

That’s profound, but you, too, seem to be missing the point. The union is claiming that, with more duties and increased risk, they need to meet and confer with their employer, the city, before new conditions are imposed.

Best,

JE

Say what you will about the odds of Prop F working well, but it seems like a huge overreach to claim that it’s a change in the “wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment” of city employees.

This interpretation would basically give unions a veto over any and all city policy changes – if you have city workers enforcing or implementing a policy, any change to the policy will change the nature of their daily work at least a little bit. If that counts as changing the “terms of employment” and requires union negotiations, then virtually every law and proposition in the city would get bogged down in union talks. No thank you!

In reply to Floyd Thursby.

You are making a philosophical argument about whether or not we have an obligation to provide support to homeless people. That’s beyond the scope of this article – Joe’s reporting is focused on the union’s position on Prop F, which is that SEIU workers would have to shoulder additional work and risk in order to carry out this testing. The union’s objections are practical, not moral.

In reply to Joe Eskenazi.

If you have to give people money because you fear for your safety, that is called extortion.

In reply to Joe Eskenazi.

If your scared call the police.

In reply to xina.

Xina,

Forgiving as the screens at Human Resources may be they probably wouldn’t hire Police cadets who had already shot someone or been accused of brutality.

I had a friend turned down for smoking pot back in high school and he ended up a lawyer in Navy Jag advising base commander at Guantanamo.

For ‘Laterals’ the requirements are less stringent.

Two of the five officers who shot Mario Woods had shot people at previous gigs.

A cop who roughed up an ex-ladyfriend of Willie Brown in North Beach had thugged at another department and was wearing another cop’s coat and ID.

SFPD made him a training officer.

Willie hired dozens of ‘Special Assistants’ and HR never turned down a single one.

In reply to Mark.

Mark,

Prop E if I read it correctly would give the SFPOA same power SEIU is claiming here which is to peruse and influence legislation before it is even considered, let alone be put on the ballot.

Under Prop E cops don’t have to do written reports that could later hang them but can make a choice of which cop camera angles they want to provide the Public and the Public Defenders.

h.

It’s time for another investigation on the inability of the Department of Human Resources to hire personnel.

In reply to Floyd Thursby.

Floyd — 

You seem to be missing the point. The people tasked with cutting off that money fear for their safety.

JE

“anytime you come between someone and their money…” This isn’t true. These people are not adding to GDP and producing something of value. The money to them is a gift given generously by taxpayers who work hard, study, save and invest and live an upright life to be able to help them. If you are relying on taxes for rent, food, medical care and cash, you are relying on the hard work of others. There is no free lunch. Someone else earned that money. If we are giving people money, I think we have a right to say it comes with conditions, you must be doing your honest moral best to improve and make sure to minimize cost to hardworking taxpayers, which means don’t do drugs, use the free time to teach your kids and pressure them to study 15-20 hours minimum, get them to library tutors or any program available, go to parent teacher conferences, go to rehab if you have a problem, and use your time to seek out education and job training and go to the library and read self-help books to minimize your time as a burden to others, to society at large. You’re morally obligated to be thankful towards taxpayers as they’re buying your meals and paying your rent and other expenses, and make a sincere effort to improve as a person and recognize the role your previous decisions and lack of effort played in your current need to live on the hard work of other people. So yes, we have a right to say, show us you’re seriously having bad luck but doing your best to control your actions and improve in the future and become a better person. Let it be an investment, not enablement. Require people work hard and be thankful for the hard work of others. If you’re doing fentanyl or heroin or meth or crack or other drugs and are living on the hard work of others, and are argumentative and unwilling to admit you have a problem and go to rehab, we must require you change your behavior and outlook and we must tutor your kids and make sure your kids don’t follow you into poverty by having the same bad habits and actions. I’m not saying you didn’t have challenges, but you owe it to people working hard, including children in whose name we are borrowing money to feed and house you, to do your best, and really do your best, not a lame version of it which doesn’t require actual behavioral change or effort. These are the facts, and they are undisputed.

Breed could care less. Prop F, like Prop E, is pure theater. It appears to do something but does nothing. Or it makes things worse. Either way the purpose is to curry favor with billionaire coke heads, who she thinks key to her election, who cry loud about drug addicts taking over the streets. BTW, they receive City welfare in the form of tax breaks but will not get tested under this or any law.

Too little too late.
London Bred and admistration need new careers

As an employee of a long-term housing facility that would likely house folks after treatment, I can tell you we don’t have the staff. We still have empty beds because the city can’t get its’ act together and hire staff in a timely manner. If the mayor really wants to fix this, a complete audit of the Byzantine HR dept. should be her top priority.