I’ve read a lot of words about Farrell but none address his general position on housing (just his view on homeless). Does he support the state’s housing element? Is he for or against also adding a lot of MR housing? Can someone tell me? Thanks!

In reply to B..

The fact is that treatment is *never* mentioned, only Narcan handouts, so-called “safe injection sites” (actually city-sanctioned “shooting galleries” forced down the throats of working-class neighborhoods of color by rich white liberals who live high up on the hills), and voting for soft-on-crime laws (by those self-same wealthy white liberals and members of the ACLU). And take it from someone who has lived in SF since 1991 – and in the Mission and TL, not what our friend “B.” calls “privileged” areas where “crime was not as present” – SF is far dirtier, and less safe, than it has ever been in all of the decades that I have lived here, and in the decade before I moved here but was a frequent visitor. And by the way, I am a lifelong progressive/liberal at heart, but I think our city has truly lost its way and is killing the small businesses, and punishing artists, and working-class people, at the expense of people who moved here from other places because it was easy to do drugs here on the taxpayer’s dime than it is in, say, Kansas City or Cleveland.

In reply to John.

This is not the correct corollary. The correct one would be that crime would rise with rising prices, not treatment, because treatment was not mentioned or implied in this hypothetical scenario. The problem with this scenario is that it isolates other factors and fails to follow the factors relating to drug market changes and user use/demand in response.

But you also err on the fact that SF was safer in the 90s/00s/10s.

This is unfactual in trends generated by the FBI UCR data, https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm

Overall crime, even when broken down by category, is overall far down than what it was in the 90s.

It was far more unsafe in the past decades following the 90s.

This indicates you lived a more privileged area where crime was not as present.

In reply to marcos.

Crime with drug use is not that simple of a correlation.

For example, if I were to pose the additional logic that someone becomes more mentally ill with heavier drug use and/or more easily susceptible to commit crime, then more drug use means more crime.

It’s a confluence of factors that sustain crime and drugs. It’s not that simple.

In reply to marcos.

yep

In reply to Thomas Douting.

The shoplifting and property crime is DIRECTLY related to the previous DA. Not because he let them out, but because as soon as he said he was going to prosecute that cop who shot the guy in the back from his car, SFPD stopped arresting property crime. I literally watched 2 guys walking on vallejo from central station as someone got chased out of walgreens. They did nothing, just kept walking. Right after the recall, arrests for property crime trippled,

Now, you can say, “Oh, well the guy would have released them anyway!”. Is that OK? If the police think someone isn’t going to get prosecuted, should they just watch crime happen? Is it the police’s job to decide what happens AFTER someone is elected.

I was never pro DA or whatever. I was ALWAYS pro SFPD. For 20 damn years. But this time…. sorry, that was way out of line, do don’t blame that DA and run around calling people a Marxist. It literally doesn’t matter. If arrests drop by 300% is it the DA’s fault?

In reply to marcos.

Only if that “progressive” was very unpopular and only won due to the quirks of ranked voting, e.g. Chesa.

Campers,

You can bring in Rambo as a new Police Chief and the troops would ignore him.

And, listen to the SFPOA.

This ain’t the only town where this is true.

SF’s cop union took drug proceeds from the Executive Director of the San Mateo POA’s World wide dealing.

SFPOA then divided the drug money amongst favored candidates.

This ain’t Mayberry.

And, the various unions have what is essentially an Underground Railroad for Rogue Cops whom Irish Command Staff has then made into Training Officers.

They hire more of these ‘Lateral Transfers’ than they graduate Cadets.

The vacancies are intentional to guarantee overtime to pay mortgages.

Quickest way to change things is to make Police Chief and elected position then choose the one whose Platform best matches your own biases and pull the lever next to her name and if they don’t perform, vote them out.

“After a couple of tries you’ll get someone like me who’ll last 32 years.”

That’s quote from our awesome former Sheriff Michael Hennessey.

In reply to marcos.

Disagree – low prices on their own really don’t mean much either way other than the crime level now is what is needed to sustain the market. Again, if you assume that crime is being driven in part by feeding addiction. Your argument might be true if prices drop even more. But, then again, the corollary is that if prices are *raised,* other options (e.g. treatment) might become more attractive.

Again, I urge someone, anyone, to get into the race and make the “this is scaremongering” argument. It needs to be heard and articulated by someone who knows what they are talking about.

The idea that the PTSD is being driven by the discourse – would like to hear more on that score. I’m not Farrell, I’ve only lived here for like 30 years but the idea that SF is as safe to walk around at night as it was in the 90s/00s/10s does not resonate with me or a lot of other folks of my or longer tenure here. It also doesn’t seem to be resonating with the tourism and convention folks.

Having a “vision” for the city is not just appeasing the existing nor platforming on the current hot topic issues. It’s understanding what is needed for the future of the city. housing transit public spaces and infrastructure… most of the SFBOS are in the weeds and few can get their heads out of the muck and morass to solve the bigger problems. When an earthquake hits and the shit hits the fan who do u want in charge and controlling the city mechanisms for the future? So far none of the above is my vote….none have shown the ability to really solve for the whole city mostly nibbles and bites of the cookie 🍪 but not the whole city as a system… that takes a bigger approach to developmental changes.

To minimize SF’s crime problem is ridiculous. Yes, the murder rate is comparatively low, and it was much higher decades ago. Most of us know that. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a crime problem. The city has the highest, or among the highest property crime rates in the country. The shoplifting, both by organized gangs and by individuals, the smash and grabs, the businesses who suffer repeated burglaries. The home burglaries, the car break ins, the street robberies, etcetera, etcetera. It’s beyond belief. The assaults on the elderly, especially Asians. The crime rates, both violent crime and property crime, are probably a lot worse than we know because many crimes are not reported. “What’s the point?”, people say. If the SFPD doesn’t follow up as much as we’d like, maybe it’s because for years, until very recently, they’ve gotten no support from City Hall, the media, or the political left, which doesn’t even want to take crime seriously, or even shows sympathy for crime and criminals. And ML’s support for that Marxist former DA earns nothing but my contempt. Occasionally I approach cops on the street and tell them I am grateful for their presence and trying to do their jobs. They ALWAYS react with surprise and sincere gratitude. They are more used to being cursed at or spit on. They are more used to seeing things like the sign that was in a storefront window up the street from me for a long time: “ACAB.” But thanks for the this story nonetheless. I think I may have just figured out who will get my vote.

In reply to Bad Politicians, No Donut.

I remember a long time ago when a city supervisor came to a first day at Rosa Parks ES and mistakenly called us “John Muir ES.”

I suppose that Breed and Farrell were mistaken too when they called themselves best friends? Maybe they were under the spell of the culture of that school for a moment?

If only every school, and even our whole city, could run as well as that school. When I need hope for the future of this city, my mind always takes me to Rosa Parks ES. It was not perfect, but it never had to be.

In reply to John.

If drugs are cheaper here than anywhere else, then logically it follows that less crime would be required for addicts to sustain their fix.

At some point, the rage farming and scaremongering will wear thin, people will be left with post-traumatic stress and will turn their ire on those who baited them so transparently.

“…’flooding’ the police academy with new recruits” – does he understand that the police academy can’t find enough people who want to become police officers? Where does he plan to find them? Hopefully SF won’t start hiring police who have left previous jurisdictions after terrible behavior, as we keep hearing about elsewhere.

“Creating tax incentives for businesses that bring workers back downtown.” – does he understand that companies are not successfully requiring employees to return to the office? Create an incentive for employees to return, and maybe he’ll have more luck. (And before you say, their incentive should be keeping their jobs: no, not these days.)

In reply to Gary.

The BCDC is coming after the State for letting parks like Candlestick State Park fall into disrepair. I am sure this decrepit structure, ready to fall into the Bay in pieces, is also on the Commission’s radar. I’d contact them to find out if anything’s being done about it.

Good read for an op-ed.

I don’t think the Horseshoe dig really works. I think a lot of residents would like cops outside of the Horseshoe and at UN Plaza/UC Law SF at 2 am. Except someone was shot at UC last night, not on Chestnut. Failing the ability to be in both places, would be awesome if we covered one of them. Right now, we are effectively covering neither. It would be good were we in a position to cover one. Awesome to cover both.

Although I will concede that the Lee murder was hopped on by people wanting to drive a narrative before the facts were known – few argue the City is unsafe because of its murder rate. They do argue it’s unsafe because drugs are cheaper and more available here than in Merced, LA, or pretty much anywhere else in California or most major cities in the US. And the climate which both creates that and results from that is not a safe one.

If you’re really saying, it’s safe enough for a candidate saying “rarely been more safe than today – vibes to the contrary are wrong” to win 35% of the vote and hit the right ranked choice outcomes in November, I’ll take your point- that’s possible. But that the past DA was thrashed in up/down referendum on the subject with no 2nd, 3rd, or 4th options seems to have sent a message to others.

Did Farrell lay out plans for homeless shelters in the Marina?

Were a progressive/liberal to run and win, the fundraising for a recall would start before the last votes are counted.

Even if he doesn’t win, hopefully Farrell’s candidacy will focus the candidates on issues that matter: reducing crime and cleaning up our streets.

At the “official” opening of the Rosa Parks Elementary School shared schoolyard some number of years ago, Breed and Farrell were practically making googly eyes at each other as they told us they were the best of friends.

I guess they’re no longer “besties.”

Oh, well.

The first qualification for getting my vote: Not being funded by BigMoneySF.

And while I know that this does not fall under the city’s jurisdiction, I want to see advocacy to fix or rebuild the Aquatic Park Pier. I realize that it doesn’t benefit the wealthy so our leaders don’t care, but it would be nice to see this kind of investment for us now and for future generations.