> The city’s solution: more of the same, but waste even more money. Instead of addressing the rotting SRO buildings, the administration is on a real-estate buying spree.
The whole thing is a scheme for local politicians to enrich their friends and family in the construction and real estate businesses. They buy new buildings using public funds, let junkies trash the buildings, then use that as an excuse to buy even more new buildings.
San Francisco's government is effectively a single-party system (ostensibly the elections for city government are non-partisan, but let's be real.) Politicians face virtually no accountability, and who's fault is this? It's the electorate who keeps voting to put the same failures back in charge. This is what the people of San Francisco vote for, and how does anybody propose to fix that?
Portland does the same thing. Every time they spend big money on a building for a shelter, it goes nowhere but the commission for the sale just happens to go to an agent related to a council member who made the decision. And yet we keep doing it…
The whole thing is a scheme for local politicians to enrich their friends and family in the construction and real estate businesses. They buy new buildings using public funds, let junkies trash the buildings, then use that as an excuse to buy even more new buildings.
San Francisco's government is effectively a single-party system (ostensibly the elections for city government are non-partisan, but let's be real.) Politicians face virtually no accountability, and who's fault is this? It's the electorate who keeps voting to put the same failures back in charge. This is what the people of San Francisco vote for, and how does anybody propose to fix that?