Ask pretty much any San Franciscan what’s wrong with their City and they’ll quickly come up with a passionate, well-considered, response: too many mentally unstable people living on sidewalks; streets are filthy; schools aren’t effectively educating students, especially Hispanics and African-Americans; local government spends too much and is too ineffective; retail crime and car break-ins are out-of-control; the police aren’t responsive. They could go on.
Residents have been ruminating over these problems for years, even decades. Some things have improved. Crime of the worst kind is far less frequent today than in the past, and recently drug arrests have spiked in the Tenderloin. The number of unhoused individuals is lower than 20 years ago. But by and large the perception, at least, is of a largely rudderless municipality.
There’s no doubt that if San Francisco wasn’t as rich as it is, and endowed with such powerful state and federal politicians, it’d be in much worse shape. Our ability to throw money at problems without actually solving them is legendary. But with the Downtown property tax engine running on empty, the death of Dianne Feinstein, and the winding down of Nancy Pelosi’s career and Gavin Newsom’s governorship, money and power may not be so easily wielded.
Plausibly effective ideas have been floated for most public problems. Together SF Action wants to reform political institutions by expanding mayoral power, dismantling commissions, and adding citywide supervisors. RescueSF proposes to increase unhoused shelter capacity and improve government data transparency. Grow SF suggests reducing housing construction red tape, fully funding a public transportation system that’s run by competent professionals, and fielding a well-trained, adequately supported, police force.
The underlying theme of these proposals is that we need a more forceful set of politicians, supported by a reinvigorated civil service that’s firmly part of the solution, rather than a contributor to the problems. The ideas lean what might be called “moderate” in that they suggest greater centralization of executive power, though they also look “liberal” in their implicit call for government expenditures.
All in, rather than “progressive” versus “conservation,” the emerging body of thinking is about effective versus ineffective, or what works and what doesn’t. What isn’t working are many of our primary institutions and underlying processes. The San Francisco Police Department is top heavy, ill-trained, understaffed, and dispirited. Recreation and Park Department shines because of the enormous cushion of cash it’s been floating on for the past decade, some of which comes from excessive overhead charged to such projects as Esprit Park’s renovation. As that steadily deflates so too will Rec and Park’s maintenance and monitoring. The City’s procurement process is riddled with embedded corruption, as evidenced by the absurd prices paid for just about everything. The Department of Public Works, well, you fill in the blanks.
The remedy for all of this is to shake off our collective frustration and apathy and lean in to making a better city. The emergence of new civic groups, even if they are bankrolled by billionaires, is hopefully a harbinger of greater engagement. Join one that’s new or one that’s old. Support a candidate who understands that it’s their job to get things done, rather than talk about getting things done, or blame others for not getting things done. Vote. Do so fiercely and persistently, so that we elect politicians who are also fierce and persistent. The adage that we get the politicians we deserve is true.
The reason we’re so quick to point out our collective problems is because we love where we live and want it to be better. If we get to work making things work, it will be.