San Francisco appears to pass measure for welfare recipients to be drug-tested
San Francisco voters appeared to have approved a controversial measure that would require welfare recipients to be screened for illegal drug use as the city lurches to the right amid a worsening addiction crisis.
Under the ballot measure, Proposition F, welfare recipients who use illegal drugs would be mandated to undergo treatment or be denied cash assistance. If they were found to be using drugs, an addiction specialist and the recipient would agree on treatment options that include residential care, a 12-step program, individual counseling and replacement medication.
Voters also backed more conservative public safety policies in Tuesday’s election. The drug-testing measure was one of two measures put before voters by the San Francisco mayor, London Breed, as the city grapples with the impact of a homelessness and addiction emergency. Breed, who’s up for reelection in November, faces three serious opponents who say her administration has failed to deal with drug crime, vandalism and theft.
Breed has moved away from a harm-reduction model and instead backed more punitive policies. She has argued that the drug-testing measure would ensure “more people get the help they need and change what’s happening in our city.
“We can’t just keep giving people money to overdose and die on our streets – we have to do more,” she said on Tuesday evening.
The measure will go into effect next year and will affect more than 5,000 city residents who receive cash assistance, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
The second measure, which also appeared set to pass, would increase police powers, granting officers greater leeway to pursue suspects in vehicles, authorize police use of drones and surveillance cameras, reduce paperwork requirements, including in useof-force cases and reduce the powers of the citizen police oversight commission. A recent analysis by the San Francisco Standard found that the collision rate for police chases in the city is the highest among all major cities in the state.
The propositions were funded by tech-backed civic advocacy groups and CEOs like Chris Larsen of the cryptocurrency firm Ripple and Jeremy Stoppelman of Yelp, and supporters far outspent opponents.
Opponents accuse tech billionaires of trying to buy the election and say Breed is simply trying to shore up votes for November. The proposals will not make the public safer, they argue.
“Everyone is operating on the terrain that’s set by the mayor and the billionaire class,” the former supervisor John Avalos told Politico. “It’s a politics of fear, and we need a politics of hope. We’re losing our standing on the hope side.”
San Francisco resident Bernice Casey voted against both measures.
“People who are receiving aid should not be drug-tested, and I think the police need more accountability, not less,” said Casey, a city government worker.
Charley Goss, who voted yes on both, said police need more tools and voters deserve a new approach to crime and drug use.
“There’s a lot of drug abuse on our streets and it manifests itself on lots of issues from public safety to quality of life,” said Goss, who works for a landlords’ association.
Supporters of Proposition F include recovery advocates, who say it is far too easy for people to get and use illegal drugs in San Francisco and there are not enough options to help them become sober.
The measure does not include a sobriety requirement, only that a person make a good-faith effort to participate in treatment if they want to receive cash assistance, which maxes out at just more than $700 a month.
Sara Shortt, a spokesperson for the No on F campaign, counters that the measure punishes people who need help and could result in them losing housing.
“People will not be comfortable going to request services when they know they will be asked intrusive questions and then mandated to participate in a program,” she said.