A few notes on the TogetherSF homelessness forum tonight with Dist. 17 assembly candidates, 1/12/22

I caught most of this hour-long forum I mentioned a few days ago, between State Assembly candidates David Campos, Matt Haney, Thea Selby and Bilal Mahmood, with Chronicle columnist Heather Knight moderating, but they had no opportunity for members of the public to ask questions unfortunately. None of the candidates (all Democrats) stood out as being much better or different than the others. Here’s a few notes I took on random stuff they said – largely about needing more money and wanting to force or nudge more people into programs – this is not exhaustive, but gives a flavor:

Campos - Wants to sponsor a statewide bond measure, said homelessness not just an SF problem

Selby - People in tents is not compassionate; wants to have government buy space for them in hotels

Haney - It’s not compassionate to let people live on streets/sidewalks; blocking sidewalks “not acceptable”; said he’s “grateful for the governor’s leadership” (wanting to remove homeless from streets); wants to have places for the homeless more distributed (instead of concentrated in the Tenderloin which is part of his supervisorial district)

Campos - “When tents sprang up in District 9 [where he was supervisor], I worked diligently to get rid of them” ; “the time of letting every jurisdiction decide for itself what to do with homelessness - that time has passed”; more resources are needed

Mahmood - (disagreeing w/Campos) "It’s an ideas problem, not a money problem. mentioned plenty of money in the governor’s $2 billion budget; but wants personalized, customized treatment which he said has worked elsewhere (mentioned Rockford?); sounds like he still wants government to provide this treatment, but somehow thinks it will cost less(?);

Campos - The $1 billion we had in Santa Clara [Campos worked there for a while as a deputy county supervisor after he was an SF supervisor] was not enough even for that county; “We’re talking about 10s of billions of dollars being needed” (statewide)

Haney - Conservatorship program is “broken”; wants more people to be eligible; but a problem is there aren’t enough beds/placements to help the people already eligible; “we also need a state system of care”

Campos - Emphasized his “experience”, also “knowledge”, “effectiveness”; “that’s what I bring to the table”

Mahmood - “I do support conservatorship”; people “need decisions made for them so they can get better”; he would try to “reduce the threshold” needed to force people into such violations of their rights

Selby - Said she has an office near Polk & Market; told story of walking by a soaking wet homeless woman in the rain going to lie on some soaking cardboard; said she called 311 and they sent someone out to check on them, but the homeless woman refused help; Selby said “women are not allowed in in these places if they don’t have IDs”(!); she also mentioned “trafficked women” [trafficking is greatly over-hyped and I’m wary of anyone who portrays it as a major problem because the authorities use it to keep consensual activities among adults criminalized/demonized -Starchild]; said that “they don’t have IDs”; “we definitely need to figure out a better way… conservatorship is a part of that”; favors “stronger conservatorship laws”;

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))

P.S. – My further correspondence with one of the forum’s organizers is below (I had asked a few days prior about audience participation, etc., and was told they’d have questions if there was time):

···

On Jan 12, 2022, at 9:01 PM, Starchild for SF! wrote:

P.S. – I would be happy to participate as a speaker myself in a future forum, debate, or community event TogetherSF might hold – just reach out and let me know if the group is interested in airing some more diverse/dissenting views.

On Jan 12, 2022, at 8:58 PM, Starchild for SF! wrote:

Hi Rob,

As you may recall, this is exactly what I predicted would happen with the “if we have time” approach. I hope TogetherSF has learned a valuable lesson and will try to make sure that if the group holds any other forums (fora) going forward, they will be more participatory and grassroots-empowering.

FYI, Bilal Mahmood’s campaign has not gotten back to me even after I copied them on my previous email to you. I’ve also reached out separately to Thea Selby’s campaign in response to mass-audience (spam) emails they’ve been sending, and received no response.

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))
(415) 573-7997

P.S. – I don’t recall being previously aware of TogetherSF prior to hearing about this event. Who runs the group and what are their goals? Are there any issues on which TSF supports reducing the size, cost, expense, scope, or power of government, or conversely expanding the empowerment and autonomy of individuals? Was disappointed (though not surprised) by the cacophony of agreement among the candidates tonight in supporting more spending on (failed) government programs, more authoritarian laws on “conservatorship” (a euphemism for taking people’s rights away from them), etc.

On Jan 12, 2022, at 8:18 PM, Rob Aiavao wrote:

Hi Starchild,

Sorry for not responding sooner. I was the time keeper for tonight’s event so I wasn’t able to check my emails. As I mentioned in my previous email, we would include audience questions if we had time. While we did have several that were sent to me ahead of time from audience members, we unfortunately couldn’t get to them within the hour.

Again, I encourage you to reach out to the individual campaigns if you have any specific questions for their candidates.

Thank you and have a great night.

Rob

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:56 PM Starchild for SF! RealReform@earthlink.net wrote:

    Well?

On Jan 12, 2022, at 7:31 PM, Starchild for SF! wrote:

Hi Rob,

  The Zoom chat has been disabled and I can't see myself on screen. How will audience members be able to ask questions and participate in the debate happening now?

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))

P.S. – I had to “sign up” for something(???) to get access – not sure what that might entail, but I do not consent to any use of my information other than to contact me with personal (not mass audience) emails. Please DO NOT add me to any list or retain my info in any organizational database or give, sell, or trade it to any other group. Thanks for your understanding/cooperation.

Together SF and other volunteer activities can be accessed by Shine On SF: Get Involved — Shine On SF. Shine On SF is local organization with ties to the mayor’s office. This is a great way to get involved in our communities and create a presence for the Libertarian Party of San Francisco. I would like to propose the that the LPSF officially get involved with Shine on SF.

For less than 6% of the #USgovt Pentagon budget, every homeless person in the USA could be housed in something humane — WITH PRIVATE FLUSHABLE TOILETS to eradicate 90% of the street blight for less cost, larger than a prison cage, better than most current subsidized housing in the ghetto “projects” & better than most trailer parks.

But folks in that CULT WORSHIP & IDOLIZE #USgovt/Pentagon goons/thugs; so that simple fix is unmentionable. Expecting #USgovt to fix itself is a FOOL’S errand.

Without destructive #USgovt/state overregulation, private industry could & would build such housing, faster & lest costly than govt, on any of the federal/“public” lands that abound ( more than 25% of the lower 50 states alone ).

It costs more to house someone at San Quentin than to cage them in a boutique hotel in downtown SF with free teevee/wifi/“surveillance” & daily cleaning/mainenance.

“America” died between 1913/1943; we’re now beating a rotting corpse, but simply annoyed by its stench & the flies, & yet refuse to simply bury it & buy a new horse.

audre lorde masters tools

 Volunteering in the community can indeed be a good way to build community and solidarity, showing via our actions how people can come together to get positive things done without government.

 In the past, LPSF members have volunteered in helping feed people for the holidays with Raphael House, an independent charity that doesn't take government funding, as I recall. Mike Denny may be able to say more about them, as I think he was among those who participated.

Love & Liberty,

((( starchild )))

···

-----Original Message-----
From: LPSF Forum
Sent: Jan 18, 2022 9:55 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [LPSF Forum] [Discussion] A few notes on the TogetherSF homelessness forum tonight with Dist. 17 assembly candidates, 1/12/22

CDMendes (Libertarian Party of San Francisco)
January 18 Starchild:this
Together SF and other volunteer activities can be accessed by Shine On SF: Get Involved — Shine On SF (Shine On SF: Get Involved — Shine On SF). Shine On SF is local organization with ties to the mayor’s office. This is a great way to get involved in our communities and create a presence for the Libertarian Party of San Francisco. I would like to propose the that the LPSF officially get involved with Shine on SF.

Visit Topic (A few notes on the TogetherSF homelessness forum tonight with Dist. 17 assembly candidates, 1/12/22 - #2 by CDMendes) or reply to this email to respond.

Previous RepliesStarchild (Libertarian Party of San Francisco)
January 13I caught most of this hour-long forum I mentioned a few days ago, between State Assembly candidates David Campos, Matt Haney, Thea Selby and Bilal Mahmood, with Chronicle columnist Heather Knight moderating, but they had no opportunity for members of the public to ask questions unfortunately. None of the candidates (all Democrats) stood out as being much better or different than the others. Here’s a few notes I took on random stuff they said – largely about needing more money and wanting to force or nudge more people into programs – this is not exhaustive, but gives a flavor:
Campos - Wants to sponsor a statewide bond measure, said homelessness not just an SF problem
Selby - People in tents is not compassionate; wants to have government buy space for them in hotels
Haney - It’s not compassionate to let people live on streets/sidewalks; blocking sidewalks “not acceptable”; said he’s “grateful for the governor’s leadership” (wanting to remove homeless from streets); wants to have places for the homeless more distributed (instead of concentrated in the Tenderloin which is part of his supervisorial district)
Campos - “When tents sprang up in District 9 [where he was supervisor], I worked diligently to get rid of them” ; “the time of letting every jurisdiction decide for itself what to do with homelessness - that time has passed”; more resources are needed
Mahmood - (disagreeing w/Campos) "It’s an ideas problem, not a money problem. mentioned plenty of money in the governor’s $2 billion budget; but wants personalized, customized treatment which he said has worked elsewhere (mentioned Rockford?); sounds like he still wants government to provide this treatment, but somehow thinks it will cost less(?);
Campos - The $1 billion we had in Santa Clara [Campos worked there for a while as a deputy county supervisor after he was an SF supervisor] was not enough even for that county; “We’re talking about 10s of billions of dollars being needed” (statewide)
Haney - Conservatorship program is “broken”; wants more people to be eligible; but a problem is there aren’t enough beds/placements to help the people already eligible; “we also need a state system of care”
Campos - Emphasized his “experience”, also “knowledge”, “effectiveness”; “that’s what I bring to the table”
Mahmood - “I do support conservatorship”; people “need decisions made for them so they can get better”; he would try to “reduce the threshold” needed to force people into such violations of their rights
Selby - Said she has an office near Polk & Market; told story of walking by a soaking wet homeless woman in the rain going to lie on some soaking cardboard; said she called 311 and they sent someone out to check on them, but the homeless woman refused help; Selby said “women are not allowed in in these places if they don’t have IDs”(!); she also mentioned “trafficked women” [trafficking is greatly over-hyped and I’m wary of anyone who portrays it as a major problem because the authorities use it to keep consensual activities among adults criminalized/demonized -Starchild]; said that “they don’t have IDs”; “we definitely need to figure out a better way… conservatorship is a part of that”; favors “stronger conservatorship laws”;
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
P.S. – My further correspondence with one of the forum’s organizers is below (I had asked a few days prior about audience participation, etc., and was told they’d have questions if there was time):
··· (click for more details) (A few notes on the TogetherSF homelessness forum tonight with Dist. 17 assembly candidates, 1/12/22)

Visit Topic (A few notes on the TogetherSF homelessness forum tonight with Dist. 17 assembly candidates, 1/12/22 - #2 by CDMendes) or reply to this email to respond.

You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here (Libertarian Party of San Francisco).
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here (Libertarian Party of San Francisco).

I’ve volunteered at the meal service program at the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in the Castro in the past. ( For the past year, I’ve volunteered at the Berkeley Quaker/Friends Church Food Panty, once or twice a week. It’s a great way to at least float/soft-sell/chat about Libertarian Solutions to the uninitiated & plant seeds (nothing hard core). I particularly enjoy engaging with Catholics ( especially the Ds ) when the inbred contrived polarizing topic of abortion comes up & can demonstrate that the Libertarian Solution is BOTH pro-life & pro-choice & pro-Mom & pro-Family & anti-corporatist ( #medicalindustrialcomplex #industrialprisoncomplex ) & moreover pro•ADOPTION which is the common ground solution that cuts through all the political noise & appeals to nearly every demographic. Once we cut out #USgovt/state regulations, even economically disadvantaged Moms would be empowered to negotiate adoption options with the legions of wannabee parents & families out there & make a profit ( $30k-50k+ cash, untaxed ) that lifts her out of desperation; it’s a big win for the Mom, the Child, the Family / Community ( & a big loss for govt middlemen & cronies who thrive off the divisive rhetoric & the status quo ).

https://www.raphaelhouse.org/about/

The Raphael House looks great. How far in the past was the volunteer event? Do we have any photos to show for marketing materials or proof of involvement from the LPSF? Do we have any tracking of who attended or how often? Do we have any tracking of people who may have requested more info from the LPSF?