8 ms·

The human waste and needles on the street are intimately related in my mind. Step 1: People start shooting up in public bathrooms, and then passing out on the

The human waste and needles on the street are intimately related in my mind. Step 1: People start shooting up in public bathrooms, and then passing out on the toilets Step 2: Public bathrooms are closed due to the drug problem found in step 1 Step 3: Now everyone begins shitting in the street because public bathrooms are no longer available. And those people shooting up in the bathrooms are also shooting up on the street. In those public bathrooms that remain, you typically see needle disposal containers; sometimes in every stall. In Seattle on Sunday, I went to the bathroom in Macy's and every stall had them and I'm pretty sure 3 of the stalls were occupied by people doing drugs. The obvious answer is supervised injection sites where people can safely shoot up, which would then allow public restrooms to reopen and not be constantly occupied by people with needles. Unfortunately, the republican party at the national level has worked to actively prevent SF from opening these sites. So, the author, a prominent republican, should maybe consider telling his party's national apparatus to get out of the way of SF fixing their local problems rather than his weird nonsensical admonition at the end.

bradleyjg 8y ago
Supervised injection sites don't seem like the obvious answer to me. Legalize the use of drugs, sure. Provide needle exchange programs to prevent the spread of disease, maybe. But I don't know that we need to pay to provide space and staff for people to use heroin. We should draw the line in indulging people's bad habits somewhere. It isn't reasonable to shoot up in a public bathroom even if a city doesn't provide supervised injection sites any more than it is reasonable to have sex in the street if a city doesn't provide free love hotels. At some point antisocial behavior is and ought to be considered criminal.
- netsharc 8y ago
  I talked to a doctor once who said Amsterdam does what you think is "over the line", they even supplied the drugs. It's probably cheaper than "cleaning up" after the druggies, and also for the police resources needed to prevent crimes. And she said some druggies even quit, because they lost the thrill: when it was illegal and they had to do crimes to get money to buy their next hit, it was thrilling, but when all they did was go to the injection site, get high, and then go home again, some of them realized "my life needs more meaning than this". Also, since they're not busy burglarizing homes to get money to buy drugs, they could also be employed for tasks like street cleaning.
  - bradleyjg 8y ago
    Do you know when this policy was put in place? I was in Amsterdam about 15 years ago and it reminded me of San Francisco today. The train station and surrounding area was especially terrible. So I'm a little skeptical of this story.
    - saiya-jin 8y ago
      Don't know current Amsterdam situation, but we have a shooting place in Geneva, Switzerland and it works. I mean really works. Streets are cleaner, drug crime is lower. Its not a magical solution to every single problem out there obviously. I think many people have issue accepting that drug addicts are part of society. Criminalize them, and the whole underworld evolves but it won't affect their numbers much. Put death sentence on drug use, and there will still be healthy population of addicts. So with your 'drawing line' approach and misleaded comparison to sex trade, you just give ammo fodder for far right-wing populist politics, polarizing society and law enforcement, increasing crime and making it more organized, while achieving very little positive impact. Something like famous US screw-up called War on drugs.
    - jerven 8y ago
      The original policy has been in place since the 90s, and like the Portuguese and Swiss equivalent experience it drastically reduced the extremes of drug addiction. The difference in the swiss city of Geneva at the central station in the late 80s and early 90s is hell and heaven. While it does not solve all problems the methadone heroin replacement system does solve the vast majority of negative issues. Petty crime and robbery dropped significantly, whores for drugs disappeared, needle reuse is non existent. And in the 80s I was warned with reason to look out for drug needles and not touch them. This is not a worry anymore, either in the Netherlands or Switzerland. Both Amsterdam and Geneva suffer these days from organized street crime. But the risk of being attacked by a junky for your wallet is minimal. Organized street crime prefers to steal from you without you noticing and are quite skillful. Junkies needing money for a hit are more like dogs with rabies. The remaining junkies are rather fragile and slow, and not dangerous as long as they get their regular hit. Which they do in a safe and controlled environment. Having been to San Fransisco and Amsterdam these are no longer comparable at all. 25 years ago I can believe but 15 years, no.
- CathedralBorrow 8y ago
  Do you see a heroin addict as a person suffering from addiction, or more of an irresponsible person indulging in a bad habit?
  - hycaria 8y ago
    Is addiction an excuse for everything now and not simply the compulsive use of prohibited substances like it used to be ?
    - CathedralBorrow 8y ago
      I don't think I mentioned 'everything' in my comment. I was talking about heroin. What do you think compels heroin users to keep using it?
      - hycaria 8y ago
        There are many other ways to do heroin than on a busy pavement, next to your own pile of feces or in a state subsidized room. Addiction is terrible but it's not an excuse to mess up everything for others. Poster is not blaming substance use there.
      - testpostpls 8y ago
        Heroin feels pretty great.
  - bradleyjg 8y ago
    Why not both? There are addicts that live quiet unobtrusive lives and there are addicts that make everyone around them—-entire cities worth of people—-miserable. The existence of the former mean the latter don’t get off with “I’m an addict, it’s not my fault”. What we are suffering from is not merely the existence of addicts but the tolerance of addicts that choose to indulge in wantonly antisocial behavior.
    - CathedralBorrow 8y ago
      I agree that addicts can certainly be irresponsible people, just like non-addicts can be. But to your point, do you believe the solution is to arrest more drug users? Is that what you mean by tolerance of addicts?
- Pigo 8y ago
  It feels like apathy to me. It's a lot of effort and money to deal with individual drug problems. People end up on the street with their addiction after their family and friends fail to get them to face reality. Maybe there's some benefits, or savings, to letting people continue to kill themselves, but you can't kid yourself that you're doing them a favor. You do addicts a favor by not throwing up your hands. I'm open to legalization or anything that minimizes damage, but unfortunately most people don't seek help until they've hit some kind of bottom. It's a complicated issue, and just making it easier for them to use seems as simplistic as "just say no".
johnisgood 8y ago
> Step 2: Public bathrooms are closed due to the drug problem found in step 1 > Step 3: Now everyone begins shitting in the street because public bathrooms are no longer available. And those people shooting up in the bathrooms are also shooting up on the street. I am having difficulties following. How did you get from step 2 to step 3? Since when does lack of available public bathrooms lead to public defecation? Is this really a thing somewhere? I cannot wrap my mind around it. Are people really this incapable of controlling themselves? Do they just let it go wherever they are when they get the urge? Horrible. This is not really the case in the country where I am, so "everyone begins shitting in the street" certainly depends on where you are, what the culture is, and so on. It sounds really alien to me. We already do not have available public bathrooms in many areas, but public defecation is certainly not a thing. People are taught to hold it back in until they get to a bathroom... Edit: we also have fecal collecting bag dispensers, which is basically a bin (+ bags) specifically for collecting feces, usually dog. They are emptied on a daily basis. Take a fecal collection bag, put your feces inside the bag, throw it away into the bin specifically designed for collecting feces. No bathroom required, and no feces on the streets!
- EliRivers 8y ago
  I understand that in SF it is principally people who have nowhere else to do it. People who do not currently own or rent a domicile with a toilet, and who do not work anywhere where such facilities are provided, and who have no access to any public facilities. "People are taught to hold it back in until they get to a bathroom..." For these people, there isn't one.
  - johnisgood 8y ago
    OK, but do not these places have those fecal collection bag dispensers (with a bin, of course) for dogs? We do, it is emptied on a daily basis. Homeless people actually use it, apart from going to a homeless shelter which is another option.
    - rdtsc 8y ago
      I think it's a matter of local culture so to speak. I can see a different attitude in different cities and a 50/50 between "I am not using a dog bag, I am not a dog" and "I'll do what I can not make a mess on the street".
dev_north_east 8y ago
> supervised injection sites As long as they're located in the parts of town where the rich/upper class live, I say go for it.
yznovyak 8y ago
Jesus Christ, this sounds horrible. There is definitely huge cultural difference between me and an average Seattleite, but for me "supervised injection sites" doesn't look like an obvious answer at all. The thing you're describing (particularly "3 of the stalls occupied by people doing drugs") sounds like an egregious safety hazard. I'm a big guy, so probably not the easiest target, but I would be terrified to think that my mother or girlfriend could get jumped at in women's restroom. Why don't people demand police to do something about this? Yo guys, I know this may sound crazy to you, but have you thought about imprisoning those junkies? If you're so humane, maybe give them treatment AFTER you take them off the streets? While you're at it, might as well get the name of their supplier and imprison him too -- doesn't sound like a rocket science to me. I don't buy that police is doing a good job right now -- I've been living in NYC in 2011-2015 and for whole 3.5 years every Friday and Saturday there was a guy standing at the intersection outside my work at 15th & 9th peddling coke and molly (the guy was standing there, sometimes walking crosswalks and saying out loud "coke, molly, weed"; not yelling, but loud enough that passerby's could hear him).
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  > every Friday and Saturday there was a guy standing at the intersection outside my work at 15th & 9th peddling coke and molly (the guy was standing there, sometimes walking crosswalks and saying out loud "coke, molly, weed"; not yelling, but loud enough that passerby's could hear him). That's too flagrant to be legit. Did he spend Monday through Thursday listing "solvent traps" on eBay under the username "TotallyNotATF"? I could understand a dealer "advertising" in the open like that in 70s Detroit or somewhere else where the primary mechanism of "law" enforcement is getting paid by a tax on his profits and not by the city but saying "yo I got drugs for sale" is on a whole different level than standing around.
  - yznovyak 8y ago
    I honestly don't know if that was a police trap or not. But considering how easy it is to find drugs in NYC I wouldn't be surprised if it was legit. Like ... at least half of chess hustlers look like they're on something. edit: to be fair -- this may be an act to lure in regular people who may think they have a chance against a tweaker. They don't. Those guys are crazy good.
macspoofing 8y ago
>The obvious answer is supervised injection sites where people can safely shoot up, which would then allow public restrooms to reopen and not be constantly occupied by people with needles. Are you sure about that? Having traveled around Europe and North America, the only public bathrooms that weren't absolutely filthy were the ones that you had to pay for or were privately maintained (e.g. mall bathroom) So I'm not sure that's the obvious answer. Also, in your 3 steps you just assume that the level of homelessness in LA, San Fran, and Seattle is normal - and it isn't. Those municipal governments are terrified of crazy activists and have completely abrogated their responsibility to the rest of citizenry and to the homeless. The reality is that homelessness in those cities are wholly due to mental illness and/or drug abuse. The laws are so bad that even immediate family cannot forcefully institutionalize their family member and take them off the street so they can get the treatment they need. According to ACLU and activists compassion means you let those individuals (who cannot make decisions for themselves) languish in filth on the streets.
- rdtsc 8y ago
  > Those municipal governments are terrified of crazy activists and have completely abrogated their responsibility to the rest of citizenry and to the homeless. It does seem that whatever solutions they have implemented so far don't work too well. Are there cities that solved or at least made significant progress with homelessness that it would be possible to replicate. Who are the activists? Are they homeless themselves I wonder. Otherwise I have observed quite a few times when activists' interests and motivations don't align with the those of the groups they claim to represent
ironchief 8y ago
Former Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the safe injection site bill saying "enabling illegal and destructive drug use will never work." Doesn't look like "the Republican Party at the national level" to me. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2018/10/05/the-health-202-jerry-brown-vetoes-bill-to-allow-nation-s-first-safe-injection-site/5bb681771b326b7c8a8d184b/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-hea...
- radicalbyte 8y ago
  Politicians basically caused the problem by allowing Purdue etc to get a massive amount of people addicted to opiates. They should be solving the problem now not making it worse.
  - Shivetya 8y ago
    I do tend to remember that this explosive growth in addictions issues took off well before the current batch of drug warriors took office. the previous administration could have changed the course of both the drug war and the opioid problem if they had acted but they also bow down to the real power behind the drug war which is the police and sheriff unions, those who enforce and those who run the prison systems. you want to change the drug war you have to get the public employee unions out of politics one hundred percent. they perpetuate the drug war and resulting prison state far more than any corporation. they own politicians and have no issue exerting pressure to keep their power
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      >you want to change the drug war you have to get the public employee unions out of politics one hundred percent. they perpetuate the drug war and resulting prison state far more than any corporation. they own politicians and have no issue exerting pressure to keep their power You mean that giving tiny minority of people the ability to collectively bargain against the people and institutions that call the shots for society itself results in perverse incentives that are bad for society? Shocking. /s I have no problem with private sector unions but public employees are in the unique position of having an employer who is legally required to be mostly transparent and ultimately beholden to the opinions of the public. The opportunity for them to be abused by the employer/employee power imbalance is far less than that of their private industry counterparts.
Pigo 8y ago
I didn't know this was happening in Francisco, that is a very disturbing map. I've been hearing a lot about similar problems in Portland, and the local government not facing them. But I guess it makes sense since the only state that has more homeless than Oregon is California. https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/12/17/oregon-has-nations-second-highest-rate-of-unsheltered-homeless-people-according-to-new-federal-report/ https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/12/17/oregon-has-nations-sec...

bradleyjg 8y ago

Supervised injection sites don't seem like the obvious answer to me. Legalize the use of drugs, sure. Provide needle exchange programs to prevent the spread of disease, maybe. But I don't know that we need to pay to provide space and staff for people to use heroin. We should draw the line in indulging people's bad habits somewhere. It isn't reasonable to shoot up in a public bathroom even if a city doesn't provide supervised injection sites any more than it is reasonable to have sex in the street if a city doesn't provide free love hotels. At some point antisocial behavior is and ought to be considered criminal.

netsharc 8y ago
I talked to a doctor once who said Amsterdam does what you think is "over the line", they even supplied the drugs. It's probably cheaper than "cleaning up" after the druggies, and also for the police resources needed to prevent crimes. And she said some druggies even quit, because they lost the thrill: when it was illegal and they had to do crimes to get money to buy their next hit, it was thrilling, but when all they did was go to the injection site, get high, and then go home again, some of them realized "my life needs more meaning than this". Also, since they're not busy burglarizing homes to get money to buy drugs, they could also be employed for tasks like street cleaning.
- bradleyjg 8y ago
  Do you know when this policy was put in place? I was in Amsterdam about 15 years ago and it reminded me of San Francisco today. The train station and surrounding area was especially terrible. So I'm a little skeptical of this story.
  - saiya-jin 8y ago
    Don't know current Amsterdam situation, but we have a shooting place in Geneva, Switzerland and it works. I mean really works. Streets are cleaner, drug crime is lower. Its not a magical solution to every single problem out there obviously. I think many people have issue accepting that drug addicts are part of society. Criminalize them, and the whole underworld evolves but it won't affect their numbers much. Put death sentence on drug use, and there will still be healthy population of addicts. So with your 'drawing line' approach and misleaded comparison to sex trade, you just give ammo fodder for far right-wing populist politics, polarizing society and law enforcement, increasing crime and making it more organized, while achieving very little positive impact. Something like famous US screw-up called War on drugs.
  - jerven 8y ago
    The original policy has been in place since the 90s, and like the Portuguese and Swiss equivalent experience it drastically reduced the extremes of drug addiction. The difference in the swiss city of Geneva at the central station in the late 80s and early 90s is hell and heaven. While it does not solve all problems the methadone heroin replacement system does solve the vast majority of negative issues. Petty crime and robbery dropped significantly, whores for drugs disappeared, needle reuse is non existent. And in the 80s I was warned with reason to look out for drug needles and not touch them. This is not a worry anymore, either in the Netherlands or Switzerland. Both Amsterdam and Geneva suffer these days from organized street crime. But the risk of being attacked by a junky for your wallet is minimal. Organized street crime prefers to steal from you without you noticing and are quite skillful. Junkies needing money for a hit are more like dogs with rabies. The remaining junkies are rather fragile and slow, and not dangerous as long as they get their regular hit. Which they do in a safe and controlled environment. Having been to San Fransisco and Amsterdam these are no longer comparable at all. 25 years ago I can believe but 15 years, no.
CathedralBorrow 8y ago
Do you see a heroin addict as a person suffering from addiction, or more of an irresponsible person indulging in a bad habit?
- hycaria 8y ago
  Is addiction an excuse for everything now and not simply the compulsive use of prohibited substances like it used to be ?
  - CathedralBorrow 8y ago
    I don't think I mentioned 'everything' in my comment. I was talking about heroin. What do you think compels heroin users to keep using it?
    - hycaria 8y ago
      There are many other ways to do heroin than on a busy pavement, next to your own pile of feces or in a state subsidized room. Addiction is terrible but it's not an excuse to mess up everything for others. Poster is not blaming substance use there.
    - testpostpls 8y ago
      Heroin feels pretty great.
- bradleyjg 8y ago
  Why not both? There are addicts that live quiet unobtrusive lives and there are addicts that make everyone around them—-entire cities worth of people—-miserable. The existence of the former mean the latter don’t get off with “I’m an addict, it’s not my fault”. What we are suffering from is not merely the existence of addicts but the tolerance of addicts that choose to indulge in wantonly antisocial behavior.
  - CathedralBorrow 8y ago
    I agree that addicts can certainly be irresponsible people, just like non-addicts can be. But to your point, do you believe the solution is to arrest more drug users? Is that what you mean by tolerance of addicts?
Pigo 8y ago
It feels like apathy to me. It's a lot of effort and money to deal with individual drug problems. People end up on the street with their addiction after their family and friends fail to get them to face reality. Maybe there's some benefits, or savings, to letting people continue to kill themselves, but you can't kid yourself that you're doing them a favor. You do addicts a favor by not throwing up your hands. I'm open to legalization or anything that minimizes damage, but unfortunately most people don't seek help until they've hit some kind of bottom. It's a complicated issue, and just making it easier for them to use seems as simplistic as "just say no".

johnisgood 8y ago

> Step 2: Public bathrooms are closed due to the drug problem found in step 1 > Step 3: Now everyone begins shitting in the street because public bathrooms are no longer available. And those people shooting up in the bathrooms are also shooting up on the street. I am having difficulties following. How did you get from step 2 to step 3? Since when does lack of available public bathrooms lead to public defecation? Is this really a thing somewhere? I cannot wrap my mind around it. Are people really this incapable of controlling themselves? Do they just let it go wherever they are when they get the urge? Horrible. This is not really the case in the country where I am, so "everyone begins shitting in the street" certainly depends on where you are, what the culture is, and so on. It sounds really alien to me. We already do not have available public bathrooms in many areas, but public defecation is certainly not a thing. People are taught to hold it back in until they get to a bathroom... Edit: we also have fecal collecting bag dispensers, which is basically a bin (+ bags) specifically for collecting feces, usually dog. They are emptied on a daily basis. Take a fecal collection bag, put your feces inside the bag, throw it away into the bin specifically designed for collecting feces. No bathroom required, and no feces on the streets!

EliRivers 8y ago
I understand that in SF it is principally people who have nowhere else to do it. People who do not currently own or rent a domicile with a toilet, and who do not work anywhere where such facilities are provided, and who have no access to any public facilities. "People are taught to hold it back in until they get to a bathroom..." For these people, there isn't one.
- johnisgood 8y ago
  OK, but do not these places have those fecal collection bag dispensers (with a bin, of course) for dogs? We do, it is emptied on a daily basis. Homeless people actually use it, apart from going to a homeless shelter which is another option.
  - rdtsc 8y ago
    I think it's a matter of local culture so to speak. I can see a different attitude in different cities and a 50/50 between "I am not using a dog bag, I am not a dog" and "I'll do what I can not make a mess on the street".

dev_north_east 8y ago

> supervised injection sites As long as they're located in the parts of town where the rich/upper class live, I say go for it.

yznovyak 8y ago

Jesus Christ, this sounds horrible. There is definitely huge cultural difference between me and an average Seattleite, but for me "supervised injection sites" doesn't look like an obvious answer at all. The thing you're describing (particularly "3 of the stalls occupied by people doing drugs") sounds like an egregious safety hazard. I'm a big guy, so probably not the easiest target, but I would be terrified to think that my mother or girlfriend could get jumped at in women's restroom. Why don't people demand police to do something about this? Yo guys, I know this may sound crazy to you, but have you thought about imprisoning those junkies? If you're so humane, maybe give them treatment AFTER you take them off the streets? While you're at it, might as well get the name of their supplier and imprison him too -- doesn't sound like a rocket science to me. I don't buy that police is doing a good job right now -- I've been living in NYC in 2011-2015 and for whole 3.5 years every Friday and Saturday there was a guy standing at the intersection outside my work at 15th & 9th peddling coke and molly (the guy was standing there, sometimes walking crosswalks and saying out loud "coke, molly, weed"; not yelling, but loud enough that passerby's could hear him).

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
> every Friday and Saturday there was a guy standing at the intersection outside my work at 15th & 9th peddling coke and molly (the guy was standing there, sometimes walking crosswalks and saying out loud "coke, molly, weed"; not yelling, but loud enough that passerby's could hear him). That's too flagrant to be legit. Did he spend Monday through Thursday listing "solvent traps" on eBay under the username "TotallyNotATF"? I could understand a dealer "advertising" in the open like that in 70s Detroit or somewhere else where the primary mechanism of "law" enforcement is getting paid by a tax on his profits and not by the city but saying "yo I got drugs for sale" is on a whole different level than standing around.
- yznovyak 8y ago
  I honestly don't know if that was a police trap or not. But considering how easy it is to find drugs in NYC I wouldn't be surprised if it was legit. Like ... at least half of chess hustlers look like they're on something. edit: to be fair -- this may be an act to lure in regular people who may think they have a chance against a tweaker. They don't. Those guys are crazy good.

macspoofing 8y ago

>The obvious answer is supervised injection sites where people can safely shoot up, which would then allow public restrooms to reopen and not be constantly occupied by people with needles. Are you sure about that? Having traveled around Europe and North America, the only public bathrooms that weren't absolutely filthy were the ones that you had to pay for or were privately maintained (e.g. mall bathroom) So I'm not sure that's the obvious answer. Also, in your 3 steps you just assume that the level of homelessness in LA, San Fran, and Seattle is normal - and it isn't. Those municipal governments are terrified of crazy activists and have completely abrogated their responsibility to the rest of citizenry and to the homeless. The reality is that homelessness in those cities are wholly due to mental illness and/or drug abuse. The laws are so bad that even immediate family cannot forcefully institutionalize their family member and take them off the street so they can get the treatment they need. According to ACLU and activists compassion means you let those individuals (who cannot make decisions for themselves) languish in filth on the streets.

rdtsc 8y ago
> Those municipal governments are terrified of crazy activists and have completely abrogated their responsibility to the rest of citizenry and to the homeless. It does seem that whatever solutions they have implemented so far don't work too well. Are there cities that solved or at least made significant progress with homelessness that it would be possible to replicate. Who are the activists? Are they homeless themselves I wonder. Otherwise I have observed quite a few times when activists' interests and motivations don't align with the those of the groups they claim to represent

ironchief 8y ago

Former Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed the safe injection site bill saying "enabling illegal and destructive drug use will never work." Doesn't look like "the Republican Party at the national level" to me. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2018/10/05/the-health-202-jerry-brown-vetoes-bill-to-allow-nation-s-first-safe-injection-site/5bb681771b326b7c8a8d184b/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-hea...

radicalbyte 8y ago
Politicians basically caused the problem by allowing Purdue etc to get a massive amount of people addicted to opiates. They should be solving the problem now not making it worse.
- Shivetya 8y ago
  I do tend to remember that this explosive growth in addictions issues took off well before the current batch of drug warriors took office. the previous administration could have changed the course of both the drug war and the opioid problem if they had acted but they also bow down to the real power behind the drug war which is the police and sheriff unions, those who enforce and those who run the prison systems. you want to change the drug war you have to get the public employee unions out of politics one hundred percent. they perpetuate the drug war and resulting prison state far more than any corporation. they own politicians and have no issue exerting pressure to keep their power
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    >you want to change the drug war you have to get the public employee unions out of politics one hundred percent. they perpetuate the drug war and resulting prison state far more than any corporation. they own politicians and have no issue exerting pressure to keep their power You mean that giving tiny minority of people the ability to collectively bargain against the people and institutions that call the shots for society itself results in perverse incentives that are bad for society? Shocking. /s I have no problem with private sector unions but public employees are in the unique position of having an employer who is legally required to be mostly transparent and ultimately beholden to the opinions of the public. The opportunity for them to be abused by the employer/employee power imbalance is far less than that of their private industry counterparts.

Pigo 8y ago

I didn't know this was happening in Francisco, that is a very disturbing map. I've been hearing a lot about similar problems in Portland, and the local government not facing them. But I guess it makes sense since the only state that has more homeless than Oregon is California. https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/12/17/oregon-has-nations-second-highest-rate-of-unsheltered-homeless-people-according-to-new-federal-report/ https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/12/17/oregon-has-nations-sec...