The number of people sleeping outdoors in San Francisco dropped to under 3,000 in January, the lowest the city has recorded in a decade, according to a federal count.

The number of people sleeping outdoors dropped to under 3,000 in January, the lowest the city has recorded in a decade, according to a federal count.

And that figure has likely dropped even lower since Mayor London Breed — a Democrat in a difficult reelection fight this November — started ramping up enforcement of anti-camping laws in August following a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

Homelessness in no way has gone away, and in fact grew 7%, to 8,300 in January, according to the same federal count.

But the problem is now notably out of the public eye, raising the question of where people have gone and whether the change marks a turning point in a crisis long associated with San Francisco.

    • yesman@lemmy.world
      398·
      11 hours ago

      This isn’t a partizan issue, just like immigration, Democrats are fucking horrible on homelessness too.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        3·
        8 hours ago

        Republicans simply want to push the problem into other communities. Half of the Democrats want to do the same. There are a good chunk of faux progressive politicians that recognize a grift opportunity and then get money funneled to NGOs that have no oversight. But there is at least a small percentage of Democratic politicians wanting to actually solve the problem. In my county, the county bought up several hotels/motels and are housing a couple thousand homeless. In LA, they did something similar except they gave the money to an NGO that was supposed to buy up hotels and make them usable by the homeless. Instead, the NGO decided it would be a good idea to also borrow a bunch of money also to purchase the properties, couldn’t repay the loan and then the properties were repossessed and house zero homeless.

      • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
        31·
        8 hours ago

        Aside from lots of blue state tax dollars that feasibility could be spend on homelessness and other infrastructure projects subsidize red states.

        And any truly effective solutions can’t be at the city or state level, else homeless folks will migrate there for a better life, thus overwhelming the local system. It has to be federal. That means republicans get to shoot it down yet again, with how tight congress is.

      • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
        718·
        11 hours ago

        So why is the number at a decade low under a democratic mayor???

        How are you in the comment thread of an article that says homeless camping is at decade low, with a Democrat in charge, and saying the Democrats don’t care?

        I guess you’re just that dense.

        • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
          213·
          10 hours ago

          And that figure has likely dropped even lower since Mayor London Breed — a Democrat in a difficult reelection fight this November — started ramping up enforcement of anti-camping laws in August following a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

          The mayor isn’t helping the homeless. She is driving them away so they can be someone else’s problem.

          • kescusay@lemmy.world
            61·
            10 hours ago

            She. And part of her platform as mayor is a massive increase in homeless shelter beds, specifically to get homeless people off the streets and into safer environments.

            So… She’s actively not “driving them away,” near as I can tell.

          • Blackout@fedia.io
            2·
            11 hours ago

            Many were driven there in the first place from cities like Las Vegas. The truth is California has been investing in temporary shelters and tiny home communities. It’s more than I’ve seen in other states