San Francisco set up its Managed Alcohol Program (MAP) in 2020 as part of its COVID-19 response, to keep “homeless” people out of jails and emergency rooms.     

Public health officials say that alcohol is given out by nurses, who give regimented doses of beer and vodka at certain points throughout the day, depending on a person’s specific care plan.

A typical San Francisco scene

Attorney Laura Powell damned the program on X, writing: “San Francisco’s managed alcohol program provides homeless alcoholics with housing, meals, activities (including crafts and outings to Giants games), and a quantity of alcoholic beverages determined by their ‘need and desire,’ with no expectation of reducing consumption.

“With a reported budget of $5 million for 20 beds (half set aside for Latinx or indigenous people), it would be cheaper to accommodate these people in all-inclusive resorts.”

San Francisco officials claim the program saves taxpayer money by reducing calls to emergency services.

But the San Francisco Chronicle found that, in July 2022, five alcoholics in the program needed ambulance transportation at least 1,727 times in a period of five years, costing the taxpayer $4 million.

Another critic of the program is addiction specialist Amara Durham: “Where’s the medical supervision for when someone does hit that tipping point and they have been over-served because they happen to come in and get their last drink that takes them over the edge from this facility?”

Perhaps the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of the Managed Alcohol Program is this: Since 2020, it has served just 55 clients. 

Meanwhile, store owners are being forced to literally pay the price for San Francisco’s failed policies on “the homeless.”

On June 18, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors slapped a midnight-to-5-a.m. curfew on food markets and tobacco businesses in the city’s latest attempt to prevent drug abuse in the crime-ridden Tenderloin district.

But restaurants, bars and non-retail businesses are exempt. Stores can be fined up to $1,000 for each hour they operate in violation of the ordinance. 

So what can San Francisco do to effectively combat the drug- and alcohol-related plagues of Druggies, Drunks, Mentals and Bums (DDMBs)?

They can recognize that the United States Supreme Court has finally supplied at least a partial answer to this problem.

“Homeless” tents lined up toward City Hall

On June 28, the Court, in City of Grants Pass vs. Johnson, empowered cities to enforce laws prohibiting camping and vagrancy.

On September 28, 2018, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had issued Martin v. City of Boise. This held that “the Eighth Amendment prohibits the imposition of criminal penalties for sitting, sleeping, or lying outside on public property for homeless individuals who cannot obtain shelter.” 

People could be evicted only if beds or shelter were available to those who were being evicted.

The Supreme Court’s ruling overrides that decision, stating that the Eighth Amendment does not prevent a municipality from evicting homeless people from public spaces. Now dozens of Western cities are armed with greater enforcement powers to keep those spaces open and safe for everyone.

As a result, communities nationwide can fine, ticket or arrest DDMBs. But they aren’t forced to take any specific actions or to actively engage in criminal punishment.

Given the extent of the “homeless” plague facing San Francisco, the city could—and should—impose the following reforms:

• Launch a “Please Do Not Feed the Bums” publicity campaign—as it has against feeding pigeons. And those caught doing so should be heavily fined. 
• Trash cans should be equipped with locked doors, to prevent bums from using them as food dispensers.
• Those living on the street should be given two choices: Go to a local shelter or face arrest and the immediate confiscation of their possessions;
• An “Untermenschen City” should be set up near the city dump. There they can live in their tents and/or sleeping bags while being unable to daily confront or assault others to obtain free money.
• San Francisco’s rent control laws should be strengthened, to prevent future evictions owing to the unchecked greed of landlords. Tenants on fixed incomes should be given special protections against extortionate rent increases.
• Bus drivers should be able to legally refuse passengers who stink of urine/feces, as they present a potential health-hazard to others.
• The owners of restaurants, theaters and grocery stores should likewise be allowed to refuse service on the same basis.
• Those applying for welfare benefits should be required to provide proof of residence. Too many people come to San Francisco because, upon arrival, they can immediately apply for such benefits.
• Set up a special unit to remove “street people” and their possessions from city sidewalks. This could be a division of the Sanitation Department, since its personnel are used to removing filth and debris of all types.
• Forcefully tell alcoholics, drug addicts and bums: “Your anti-social behavior is not welcome here. Take your self-destructive lifestyles elsewhere. We won’t subsidize them.”

It may not be perfect, but it will certainly go further to clean up the drug- and alcohol-soaked Tenderloin than any program now on the books.

And it will not penalize those who are struggling to make a living as they brave long hours, often hostile customers, and the ever-present threat of armed robbery.