What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

I believe that our local government has a moral obligation to protect the less fortunate. Though I have attended most of Mayor Newsom’s Homeless Connect events, outreach to those in need on our Westside has been sporadic at best. This must change. Tragically, many of the homeless are San Franciscans who have been victims of the rising cost of living in San Francisco. Others have made poor decisions and need support services to turn their lives around. We have a moral obligation to help those who are committed to rejoining society.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

Homelessness has always been a major issue that has yet to be solved. As a supervisor, I hope to bring attention to the fact that the middle class have been driven out and others have been driven out into homelessness.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

Our elected representatives have demonstrated leadership in protecting our most vulnerable citizens through their support of rent control. This city is made up of approximately 50% renters and 50% homeowners. We need to demonstrate the same leadership in promoting homeownership opportunities. We can do this with a two-step plan.

First: Build more neighborhoods for family housing. This was the original plan for Mission Bay and it makes sense. Neighborhoods with schools, shopping, recreational facilities, and support services will help create new opportunities for San Francisco families.

Second: My parents bought their home with the help of the GI Bill. San Francisco can support a similar program that provides low-interest loans and grants for long-term San Franciscans, safety personnel, and educators.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

I support Care Not Cash.

Mr. Anderson originally posted his response to the questionnaire on his own blog at http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2008_09_07_archive.html. The original version contains extensive linking to other posts in the same; those links are not copied here.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

Homelessness has to be handled on the local level, since that’s where it inevitably manifests itself. Some liberals and progressives—including former Mayor Willie Brown—thought San Francisco could just punt the problem back to the Federal Government, arguing that homelessness is after all a national problem. Brown got away with essentially ignoring the problem when he was Mayor, but the squalor on our streets and in our parks only got worse, which prompted Gavin Newsom, the only city leader who understood that city voters wanted something done about it, to make homelessness the centerpiece issue of his campaign for mayor.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

Fortunately, Mayor Newsom has been doing a good job on homelessness, the only issue on which he can claim some genuine success. But Newsom’s success on homelessness couldn’t have happened if city progressives hadn’t botched the issue in the first place. During Mayor Brown’s administration, while homelessness and squalor grew on our streets, what did city progressives advocate? They cheered on Food Not Bombs and the Biotic Baking Brigade, the pie-throwers! Finally, then-Supervisor Gavin Newsom got Care Not Cash on the ballot in 2002, and grateful city voters passed the measure and elected him mayor the next year in a campaign dominated by the homeless issue.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

I don’t know, but I know what I wouldn’t do: Unlike Supervisor Mirkarimi, I wouldn’t endorse projects like the thousands of luxury highrise condos on Rincon Hill. Unlike Supervisor Mikarimi, I wouldn’t take the lead in pushing the Market/Octavia Plan, which will rezone more than 4000 properties in the middle of the city to encourage population density, including four 40-story highrises at Market and Van Ness.

Unlike Supervisor Mirkarimi, I wouldn’t take the lead in pushing the UC/Evans project on lower Haight Street to shoehorn 450 housing units into a six-acre parcel. UC lied about why it discontinued offering college courses for working people at the Haight Street site, claiming that it was too poor to maintain the property! In fact UC is now paying more than $2 million to lease property downtown for the same operation. Why not put that money into the site on Haight Street? Because, education “mission” or not, UC is just another mega-institution whose real mission, like a cancerous growth, is to expand, using real estate transactions inside its host organism, the City of San Francisco.

The city gave UC the Haight Street property tax-free for 50 years solely because of its education mission. With Supervisor Mirkarimi’s crucial assistance, UC is now cashing in, which means property that has been zoned for “public use” for 150 years will be turned into a massive housing development—much too big for that neighborhood—to fatten a predatory UC’s bottom line.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

Like the Grand Jury and the Controller, I think Care Not Cash has been a success. Mayor Newsom followed Care Not Cash with other sensible, effective programs, like Homeward Bound, Project Homeless Connect, and an emphasis on supportive housing for the homeless.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

To assist the homeless in overcoming the issues that led to them being homeless.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

Support the Community Justice Center and similar programs to get social service help to the homeless.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

Build a lot of new housing by encouraging and issuing 4 to 5 x the building permits issued over the last 30 years on an annual basis.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

I support it.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

Local government’s role is to advocate on behalf of those people that are under-represented or not represented at all. People who are homeless fit into one of these two categories. Therefore, in addressing poverty issues locally, homelessness has to be factored into policy.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

The current “transitional housing” is insufficient. I would advocate a “permanent housing” approach that would place the homeless in current vacant units citywide, publicly-subsidized by a locally-funded voucher program.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

I advocate a progressive housing policy that will mandate all future housing construction in our city meet 100% affordability goals, as opposed to the current 15% set-asides. I also advocate preserving & protecting current affordable housing through a moratorium on conversions & demolitions.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

I don’t support “Care Not Cash” and think the policy should be repealed. It is a mean-spirited program intended to drive poor people out of our city, and that’s not what San Francisco is all about.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

In my view, when it comes to homelessness, government should try to do a variety of things. First, government should try to address the root causes of homelessness — poverty and lack of economic opportunity. In so doing, government should also understand that any so-called solution to homelessness must involve the active participation of the homeless and low-income people. In the process of developing a permanent solution to homelessness, government should try to protect and defend homeless people who are often victims of attacks on their rights and their persons.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

I don’t know that anyone has the answer to homelessness. Ultimately, homelessness is something that I think will require more than just a local approach; it will require a regional, state-wide and national strategy. In terms of San Francisco’s approach, I don’t believe that Care Not Cash is the answer. In my opinion, Care Not Cash is punitive and fails to address the underlying socioeconomic causes of homelessness. To me, addressing homelessness requires creating more social programs and opportunities for people. It also requires addressing larger issues such as affordable housing. Unless we are willing to do all of this, we will be unable to address the root causes of homelessness.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

There is definitely not sufficient and adequate affordable housing in the City, especially in District 9 (Mission, Bernal Heights) where many families, especially families of color, are being driven out of the City. Affordable housing will be a top priority for me. I think that it is especially important for the District 9 supervisor to take a leading role on this issue given that so many Latino families are being affected. The strategy should be to first protect the housing we have and I suggest we create a City fund that provides financial assistance to people who are fighting evictions and foreclosures. We also need to make sure that there is more affordable housing built, which is why we need to establish a permanent source of funding for affordable housing. This is why I support the November initiative that sets aside such funding. I also think it’s critical that the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan is fully vetted and that it includes sufficient affordable housing, protects PDR, and makes neighborhoods more livable for families.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

As I note before, I have opposed “Care Not Cash” because I believe that it is punitive and fails to address the rootcauses of homelessness, poverty and lack of economic opportunity.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

Homelessness is a nationwide problem. Therefore, one important role of local governments is to push the federal government to address what is really a problem of poverty and lack of public investment in affordable housing. In addition to advocacy at the federal level, local governments also make many important decisions related to how resources are allocated or what kind of policies are used to address homelessness in their own communities. Even in a climate of shrinking state and federal funding, local governments can allocate their own resources to housing, emergency shelters, and services, to support people who are homeless in reaching their goals. Local governments can choose whether to spend money on these types of services, or to focus resources on punitive measures, such as the tremendous number of “quality of life” citations issued under the current Administration in San Francisco. I do not believe that such punitive measures are an effective local policy response to homelessness.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

The first thing I would do is talk to people who are homeless and those who work with them (as service providers or advocates) to make sure I had an understanding of the most pressing issues for all of the diverse communities experiencing homelessness in the City. I would ask them what programs are most effective and advocate for continued funding of these programs if they received City funds. I would also work at a budget and policy level to advocate for long-term solutions that have proven effective, such as affordable housing (including supportive housing), mental health and substance abuse treatment on demand, job training programs, and community-building and organizing efforts.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

For the last 15 years I have worked to preserve and increase affordable housing in San Francisco. Based on my experience, I know that the biggest challenges to preserving and building new affordable housing in SF are: limited land, limited local sources of financing to pay for affordable housing development, and loss of rent-controlled housing. Therefore, I would work to ensure that publicly-owned parcels were prioritized for affordable housing development, and maximize available land for new affordable housing by limiting construction of market rate housing, especially along commercial and transportation corridors. (Such limits can be made through zoning policies, beginning with the Eastern Neighborhoods Rezoning plan.) I would work to pass measures such as the SF Housing Fund to guarantee a local source of funds for affordable housing development. I would support policies that maintain and strengthen the Rent Ordinance and Rent Control in San Francisco to protect our largest stock of affordable housing.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

My opinion of Care Not Cash is that it has not provided an adequate amount of “care” to truly help people exit homelessness.

First, many people who had their G.A. checks cut have not even gotten housing. Instead, they are only offered a shelter bed. This is not only unfair to those who now have to pay for emergency shelter—it is also creating a back-log in the system that blocks access to shelter for others who are not on G.A.

Even those individuals who did receive housing were simply placed into a residential hotel without adequate services and then expected to turn their lives around. I believe that if the City truly wants to invest in a Housing First model, we must not simply warehouse people, but rather provide environments where people feel supported and empowered to make the changes they want to make in their lives.

Another major problem with Care Not Cash is that it only leaves people with $59 per month—a lot less money than it costs to get off the streets. So even though people may have housing, they do not have resources to buy food, clothing, and other basic necessities that would help them stabilize their lives.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

San Francisco must commit the resources to provide adequate services to the homeless men and women living in San Francisco. We need assistance programs that provide for the needs of our homeless citizens. We need safe shelters, feeding programs, health and mental health services in place to provide for this vulnerable population. If we say we provide care than we have to be committed to making sure that as a city we are providing care.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

I understand firsthand how important the shortage of affordable housing is – as a renter of over 30 years in District 9 – I have been forced to move when the home I was living in was sold. I know how hard it is to find an affordable apartment to rent let alone try and buy an affordable home or condominium in District 9. I believe we need to address what has happened in District 9 with the influx of “work-live” spaces which are exempt from many residential regulations including the affordable housing requirements. We need to close the gaps in the planning process that allow developers to circumvent the affordable housing requirements. I am a supporter of Proposition B, however I am very concerned about using set asides in the budgeting process.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

The voters passed Care Not Cash and it is my personal belief that by cutting welfare payments from $359 to $59 a month it has not resulted in a substantial reduction in the homeless population in the City. I know that the CAAP caseload had decreased but I think that just means we are no longer interacting with our homeless population through the County Adult Assistance Programs. I do not believe that in January 2007 there were only 300 homeless individuals in San Francisco as was reflected by the CAAP caseload. If it is called Care Not Cash then we must provide the Care component. I support the “Real Housing, Real Care” amendment which mandates certain levels of housing and services.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

Providing social services is a crucial aspect of city government. The police, firefighters, teachers, food banks, shelters, and social workers all deliver services that San Francisco residents depend on. The city government of San Francisco has a chartered responsibility to provide adequate and effective services for those in need. When it comes to providing the homeless the necessary continuum of care the city has by and large failed in its responsibilities. Local government must identify the most pressing issues of the homeless population through building coalitions and by continuing to support organizations that encounter the homeless on a daily basis. This cooperation can only improve the understanding of what is truly needed and produce the best approaches to resolving the issues surrounding homelessness. Many drop-in centers in the city such as Mission Resource Center, Tenderloin Health, and the Homeless Outreach Team send out teams of social workers and case managers to give assistance to those who are living on our streets. These are the organizations that understand that the underlying causes of homeless include lack of living-wage jobs, housing, vocational skills, substance abuse, mental illness and domestic violence. However, the local city government continues to de-fund these drop-in centers. Buster’s Place, San Francisco’s only 24-hour drop-in center, recently closed due to city budget cuts.

The city must view the homeless as fellow residents of San Francisco and not only as a social ill that needs to be eradicated. And with that perspective the local governance will develop creative ways to keep supporting these programs.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

If homelessness is continuously viewed as a problem for the city to solve nothing positive will ever be done. Our city’s residents that are living on our streets must be seen as an opportunity to actually help our neighbors in their time of need. The supervisors are responsible to take the issues of the homeless as serious and with as much care as they do with any issue of any other constituent group in San Francisco. As supervisor I will look for ways to provide wrap around services and support for the homeless, including transitive housing. There must be an emphasis placed on increasing the abilities of the existing organizations and service providers, not the current trend of limiting resources given to these organizations. The use of umbrella organizations, such as Project Homeless Connect and the Western Regional Advocacy Project, to track the results of programs and to integrate programs can increase access to services and funding sources.

One major policy affecting the homeless on a daily basis is the criminalization of homeless individuals. The persistent efforts to criminalize the homeless cost the city millions of dollars in police and court time, involving institutions that are not expert at resolving the issues that the homeless face. The arrests and attempts at prosecution net zero results and sap the limited resources of the city. Working with the police will be key to reduce the confiscating of property and criminalizing those that are already suffering from poverty, inequity, and lack of opportunity.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

The fact that there is a lack of affordable housing in the city has been repeated in all circles. For the homeless the options of housing are extremely limited, waitlists for subsidized housing can be two-years or more. If this dire lack of affordable housing within San Francisco is not tackled head on and dealt with in a strategic manner, that puts an emphasis on creating affordable housing in San Francisco, the number of homeless folks will continue to grow.

In order to alleviate some of the housing shortage problem, inclusionary off-site housing dollars, part of any new development, nee to be aimed at rehabilitating existing housing units, creating more affordable housing stock. These funds can also be used to leverage Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) dollars from the California Housing Rehabilitation Program to rehab smaller buildings.

Along with acquiring more CDBG dollars, the city needs to focus on land acquisition to increase its emerging land trust. A land trust can be used to assist some renters and purchasers of affordable housing. My focus is to increase the stock of affordable housing, that is why I fully support the Proposition B which will allow for a city budget set aside for the construction of affordable housing.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?

Those that do not work directly with the homeless population may believe that getting more people to sleep under a roof will solve all the issues associated with the homeless. However, housing and homeless advocates view Care Not Cash as a systematic way to reduce the actual amount of money that a person receives and create a monopoly on how an individual can access benefits. In December of 2005 Mayor Gavin Newsom asserted that in five months, due to Care Not Cash program, there should be no homeless people left on the rolls at all. The city’s misguided ideal that putting people in shelters solves all the issues that face the homeless has caused residents to concede their cash grants to take housing even if they did not want it, left those without a social security number or veterans or disability recipients without real care or cash.

Not only are many individuals left out of the Care Not Cash program, it does not focus on sustainable programs that address substance abuse treatment or job training. The city has also failed to address the problem that the beds are reserved for people in the program and cause shelters to turn people away. Care Not Cash is a way for the city government to claim easy victories while ignoring the systemic structures that plague the homeless.

What do you believe to be the appropriate role of local government in approaching homelessness?

Our local government should provide baseline services to help our homeless population with food, shelter, and medical attention. Next, local government should work with agencies to integrate the homeless back into working class society.

As supervisor, what, if anything, would you attempt to do to address homelessness in San Francisco?

When elected, my focus will be on providing care for the chronically ill homeless, who is in the most need of care. I will push for “Laura’s Law” to be implemented in San Francisco to help the chronically ill.

How would you handle San Francisco’s affordable housing shortage?

I will work with developers to streamline desperately needed projects to bring more affordable housing online in San Francisco.

What is your opinion of Care Not Cash?
Mayor Newsom’s Care Not Cash is a successful city program because it provides services to those in need instead of handing out cash, which is often spent drugs and alcohol. (sic)

Eric “Protein” Moseley will soon premier the homeless documentary entitled Skid Row Journey. This film delivers to the audience the film-maker’s true experience of homelessness. Not only does Skid Row Journey illustrate the living conditions in a homeless neighborhood, but also delivers the message that a person living without a home is still able to be productive.

Laurie Winer of the LA Times wrote of Moseley’s acting that he, “cuts through the haze with a natural flair for the spotlight.”

Moseley’s next attempt is to challenge a major network to follow him around the Tenderloin for a twenty-four period.

Even though Moseley’s film will not be screening at the Chinese Theater, he will still be a motivation for some to continue with their dreams, no matter what.

Local screening date and location have not yet been set. To learn more about San Francisco screenings, contact Moseley’s daughter Erica Moseley at 323.945.8637 or moseleyerica@yahoo.com. Mr. Moseley can be reached at skidrowjourney@yahoo.com. You can learn more at http://www.myspace.com/Proteinrecords.