policyenthusiast
Senior Member
At this point, we might as well connect a vacuum tube between the City's bank account and Deloitte.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Stevey_G
- Start date
thommyjo
Senior Member
I know. Just comparing it to the police budget to somewhat mock the “announcement” for such immaterial funding. This feels like the definition of “could have been an email…”
IanO
Superstar
Here's hoping that this 650k leads to some reorg and prioritization around key crime stats or trends that will be challenging and complicated to address given everything.
Glenco
Senior Member
northlands
Senior Member
I heard the hospital didn’t even go into lockdown after it happened. Just another day at the Alex lol
Gronk!
Senior Member
whattheheck
Active Member
Come downtown, they say! (Just be careful where you look or stand or who you make eye contact with)
Greenspace
Senior Member
Good thing the Alex isn’t Downtown then.
whattheheck
Active Member
^Don't be so glib. It doesn't help the issue. As far as most people are concerned, the Alex is the city's downtown adjacent hospital. The zombieland that is 101st next to the Alex leads to DT.
It's all part and parcel. Perception is reality.
It's all part and parcel. Perception is reality.
ADob
Active Member
Came across this article this morning and figured it had some good points to make. I particularly liked the idea of accountability. My super leftie performatively woke friends (who, incidentally, don't live downtown) tend to go on and on about how we need to respect the addicts but somehow forget the flip side of respect, which, to me is accountability and consequences, and those are sadly lacking.
Last edited:
IanO
Superstar
Over the last decade or so we've made the general public become the group at risk because of stance on many things and it is simply not acceptable.
Provide options, treatment, supportive housing and for some jail, but it's far past the time to clean up our streets and communities.
Walking back from work yesterday I would say that >50% of the people I saw were doing drugs, selling drugs, impacted by drugs/mental health, homeless or those they prey on users/criminal in nature.
It's disheartening and unacceptable from a basic humanitarian stance, let alone for those of us trying to go about our daily lives without fear of having to second guess every second person you see walking down the street.
Didn't see one EPS member, no Peace Officers, no Sheriffs, no Transit Police officers in about 30min of walking to and fro.
Provide options, treatment, supportive housing and for some jail, but it's far past the time to clean up our streets and communities.
Walking back from work yesterday I would say that >50% of the people I saw were doing drugs, selling drugs, impacted by drugs/mental health, homeless or those they prey on users/criminal in nature.
It's disheartening and unacceptable from a basic humanitarian stance, let alone for those of us trying to go about our daily lives without fear of having to second guess every second person you see walking down the street.
Didn't see one EPS member, no Peace Officers, no Sheriffs, no Transit Police officers in about 30min of walking to and fro.
ADob
Active Member
I like the idea the article makes, too, that harm reduction needs to also apply to the rest of us who also exist in the space occupied by the addicts.
archited
Senior Member
In my recent trip to San Francisco I was pleasantly surprised to find drug use on the streets essentially non-existent in key parts of the City (exception being the Tenderloin district that we Uber-ed through from SFO to Nob Hill). I took a raft of photos on my stay there and made several public ventures via Cable Cars to various parts of the City, including Fishermans' Wharf, Chinatown and adjacent Little Italy. On these trips over 5 days I did not see a single case of drug use nor even pan-handling. I still plan on posting the evidence in a different thread and looking at San Francisco's effort to improve the Retail Experience -- all hopefully to the benefit of Edmonton in terms of overview experiences.
policyenthusiast
Senior Member
SF's unsheltered homelessness rate (per capita) is much higher than Edmonton's too.
The problem (or flawed solution) is that San Fran does this by concentrating all of the criminal activity and homelessness to a few areas and away from tourist locations. They essentially just round up all of their homeless people and put them in Tenderloin and SOMA, which is more viable than it is in Edmonton because it's possible to survive outside year-round. In Edmonton, outdoor fenced "corrals" for this kind of activity is generally impossible because they would freeze to death most of the year.
So yes, as a regular person in SF it's likely a lot better than Edmonton. But the strategies used don't mesh.
archited
Senior Member
^ You may be right. I had no specific reason to venture into the Tenderloin or SOMA as a pedestrian so I can't speak to those points. A friend of my client's also confirmed that the Castro District (no personal experience) had become "street-friendly". Our Uber driver did mention (anecdotally) that many drug-offenders were trucked across the Bay to Oakland but I had no way of verifying that either.