3 ms·

Bingo. SF has had a big homeless population for some time unfortunately, but the poop on the streets is fairly new. What changed? 1. ADA private right of act

Bingo. SF has had a big homeless population for some time unfortunately, but the poop on the streets is fairly new. What changed? 1. ADA private right of action spawned a class of professional plaintiffs that sue businesses over (in many cases) minor technical ADA violations like not having a coat hook at the right height in the bathroom. Many, many businesses closed their bathrooms to the public because of this. 2. Less intervention by police. In SF, the police won't arrest you for shooting heroin in a bathroom or trashing it. If the business owner calls about someone doing this, the police won't respond. The simple solution is to close the bathroom to the public. 3. Street defication effectively legalized. Similar to #2, the police won't arrest you if you poop on the street. This is different than most cities, and different than what was historically true in SF.

pmoriarty 7y ago
"1. ADA private right of action spawned a class of professional plaintiffs that sue businesses over (in many cases) minor technical ADA violations like not having a coat hook at the right height in the bathroom. Many, many businesses closed their bathrooms to the public because of this." I'd like to see the stats on the number of frivolous ADA lawsuits that caused businesses to close their bathrooms. In my personal experience, few businesses have no bathrooms whatsoever and the businesses that make their bathrooms off-limits to the public or require you be a customer to use the bathroom tend to be in areas with high homeless populations. In areas where there are few homeless the businesses almost never have a problem with a non-customer using their bathroom. This tells me that these businesses primarily have a problem with homeless people using their bathrooms, not any kind of fear over being sued over ADA violations. "3. Street defication effectively legalized. Similar to #2, the police won't arrest you if you poop on the street. This is different than most cities, and different than what was historically true in SF." Do we really want to fill our already overcrowded, mortally dangerous prisons with more homeless people? Why not just build more bathrooms, shelters, and affordable housing?
- cameldrv 7y ago
  The ADA thing is relatively new. If you go anywhere in California, not just areas with a large homeless population, you'll find most businesses do not have a public restroom. This is different than every other state I've been to. This is because California has the Unruh Civil Rights Act, which makes each ADA violation subject to $4000 statutory damages, regardless of the actual damages. Thousands of these cases are filed every year in California. California businesses don't want to be exposed to this liability, so most of them have closed their public restrooms. This lack of bathrooms creates a sort of death spiral. In high homeless areas, the few remaining ones have to serve more homeless people. Dealing with a parade of homeless people using public bathrooms as a shower or shooting up causes the remaining businesses to close their bathrooms. It becomes more difficult for homeless people to use the bathroom, so rather than go to the trouble of finding one, many use the street. On the enforcement side, I'm not really trying to be proscriptive, just descriptive. Jail is not a nice place. The threat of being arrested though is a deterrent to crime. If there is no deterrent to pooping on the street, and the alternative is difficult, people are going to poop on the street.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    "If there is no deterrent to pooping on the street, and the alternative is difficult, people are going to poop on the street." So what is the alternative when there are no public bathrooms around? To me it doesn't sound like there is one. So why arrest people when they have no choice?
    - cameldrv 7y ago
      As I said, I was being descriptive, not proscriptive. Obviously in a civilized society, everyone has access to a bathroom. Also obviously in a civilized society, people use the facilities provided and clean up after themselves. Those that are incapable or unwilling to do this either go into drug treatment, get mental healthcare, or if they are unwilling to do either of these and insist on being a public nuisance, they go to jail. SF is failing to accomplish any of these things despite a gigantic budget.
      - 7y ago

pmoriarty 7y ago

"1. ADA private right of action spawned a class of professional plaintiffs that sue businesses over (in many cases) minor technical ADA violations like not having a coat hook at the right height in the bathroom. Many, many businesses closed their bathrooms to the public because of this." I'd like to see the stats on the number of frivolous ADA lawsuits that caused businesses to close their bathrooms. In my personal experience, few businesses have no bathrooms whatsoever and the businesses that make their bathrooms off-limits to the public or require you be a customer to use the bathroom tend to be in areas with high homeless populations. In areas where there are few homeless the businesses almost never have a problem with a non-customer using their bathroom. This tells me that these businesses primarily have a problem with homeless people using their bathrooms, not any kind of fear over being sued over ADA violations. "3. Street defication effectively legalized. Similar to #2, the police won't arrest you if you poop on the street. This is different than most cities, and different than what was historically true in SF." Do we really want to fill our already overcrowded, mortally dangerous prisons with more homeless people? Why not just build more bathrooms, shelters, and affordable housing?

cameldrv 7y ago
The ADA thing is relatively new. If you go anywhere in California, not just areas with a large homeless population, you'll find most businesses do not have a public restroom. This is different than every other state I've been to. This is because California has the Unruh Civil Rights Act, which makes each ADA violation subject to $4000 statutory damages, regardless of the actual damages. Thousands of these cases are filed every year in California. California businesses don't want to be exposed to this liability, so most of them have closed their public restrooms. This lack of bathrooms creates a sort of death spiral. In high homeless areas, the few remaining ones have to serve more homeless people. Dealing with a parade of homeless people using public bathrooms as a shower or shooting up causes the remaining businesses to close their bathrooms. It becomes more difficult for homeless people to use the bathroom, so rather than go to the trouble of finding one, many use the street. On the enforcement side, I'm not really trying to be proscriptive, just descriptive. Jail is not a nice place. The threat of being arrested though is a deterrent to crime. If there is no deterrent to pooping on the street, and the alternative is difficult, people are going to poop on the street.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  "If there is no deterrent to pooping on the street, and the alternative is difficult, people are going to poop on the street." So what is the alternative when there are no public bathrooms around? To me it doesn't sound like there is one. So why arrest people when they have no choice?
  - cameldrv 7y ago
    As I said, I was being descriptive, not proscriptive. Obviously in a civilized society, everyone has access to a bathroom. Also obviously in a civilized society, people use the facilities provided and clean up after themselves. Those that are incapable or unwilling to do this either go into drug treatment, get mental healthcare, or if they are unwilling to do either of these and insist on being a public nuisance, they go to jail. SF is failing to accomplish any of these things despite a gigantic budget.
    - 7y ago