Drug Tourism in San Francisco

Why it's happening and how to change the incentives

It’s incredibly expensive for most people to live in San Francisco. Hard-working San Franciscans pay among the highest housing costs in the nation, as well as high costs for utilities, healthcare, transportation, and food.

But, San Francisco makes itself strangely affordable for one group of people - drug tourists. “Drug tourists” are drug addicts from elsewhere. Many have disaffiliated from family and friends back home. Based on word-of-mouth reports from other drug users, they travel to San Francisco in search of a place where they can feed their addiction full-time. Inexplicably, San Francisco offers generous income sources and freedom from expenses for these individuals.

• The SF General Assistance Office gives $687 per month in cash assistance

• Free needles, foil, and pipes from non-profits doing “harm reduction”

• No housing costs - addicts can camp on the sidewalk or other public spaces

• Potential to get a free San Francisco apartment in an SRO or other public housing (aka permanent supportive housing)

• Can “boost” from Walgreens and fence the stolen goods for cash

• Drugs are cheap and easily obtained in open-air drug markets

San Franciscans have an immense capacity for altruism and compassion. We enacted these social programs and criminal justice reforms intending to help people. But, we failed to consider how it would change incentives. My college economics teacher used to say that “incentives matter”, which is to say that if you want to understand why people behave a certain way, just look at the incentives and disincentives that are in place.

Michael Shellenberger @ShellenbergerMD

People say lack of housing forces local residents into the streets, but James says he came from Texas to San Francisco for the drugs, the non-enforcement of anti-camping laws, and the $820/month in welfare & food stamps. James says he sold fentanyl, 2 weeks ago, to a 15-year-old.

However well-intentioned, the incentive structure we’ve created is causing more harm (for both addicts and our society) than good. We cannot solve homelessness in San Francisco by throwing more money at non-profits, harm reduction, and housing first. As we’ve seen, this creates a magnet effect on drug tourists; it enables people to remain addicted in perpetuity; it makes the City dangerous and unlivable for the rest of us, particularly our children and small businesses.

So, how do we change the incentives for treatment-refusing addicts in San Francisco?

1. Defund the Addicts - Currently, anyone can come to San Francisco and (after being here for 15 days) start receiving $687 per month in cash “General Assistance” with NO sobriety requirements. San Francisco taxpayers are effectively funding much of the street fentanyl and meth on our streets. General Assistance should be conditional on regular drug tests. Also, if someone is cited for public drug use, their eligibility for General Assistance cash payments should end immediately.

2. Amend Prop 47 - Prop 47 reclassified theft offenses in California so that retail theft under $950 cannot be prosecuted as a felony. This has given drug addicts free license to “boost” from Walgreens and fence stolen goods for cash to feed their addiction. Many have pointed out that other states have an even higher threshold for felony theft. But, the main issue with Prop 47 is not the $950 threshold. Rather, it's that REPEAT offenses do not result in a felony. This is not the case in Texas. You can't habitually "boost" from retail stores in Texas and get away with it. But, in California, it is possible to commit over 100 thefts from Target. We need a signature effort and ballot measure to amend Prop 47 so that repeat offenses of petty theft can cumulate into a felony charge.

3. Prosecute the Dealers - The financial rewards for dealing drugs are so enormous that people will do it unless there are serious risks and consequences. Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore understood this well.

   Let me be clear, I am not advocating for capital punishment for dealers. But, I do think that long prison sentences for drug dealers are appropriate given the harm these drugs have on families. Also, harsher sentences would increase the cost of street drugs making San Francisco less appealing for drug tourists.

4. Shelter First - we need to construct sufficient shelter capacity to comply with Martin v Boise and insist that unsheltered people go there. My best estimate is that 70% will go into shelter. 30% will choose to leave San Francisco.

5. Housing Earned - Permanent housing costs $1.2M per unit to build and it’s expensive to manage and maintain (particularly if the resident has addiction issues). Seattle tried solving homelessness with “housing first”, meaning that it gave people permanent housing with no conditions that they remain sober. It hasn’t worked and it’s not going to work. A city cannot build (and enable) it’s way out of drug addiction.

   Jonathan Choe Journalist @choeshow

   SO MUCH TO UNPACK: As #Seattle continues to pour millions of dollars into the "HOUSING FIRST" model to fight homelessness, this neighbor asks "do you really believe we can build our way out of this mess?" Also, @CMDanStrauss finally acknowledges success of @weheartseattle.

   Even if San Francisco could build 10,000 units of permanent supportive housing and give one to every unsheltered homeless person in San Francisco, how would it manage and maintain those units? The more permanent supportive housing the City builds, the higher the annual costs to maintain its growing housing portfolio. The Department of Homelessness and the non-profit administrators are terrible property managers as shown by the horrifying property conditions within our SRO hotels. Also, drug addicts inflict a severe toll on the property itself as evidenced by the multimillion dollar settlements for property damage that the City paid to SIP hotel owners in 2022.

   But, even if City Hall had the funding and competence to pull it off, what will they do when 10,000 MORE drug tourists migrate to San Francisco? How about the 10,000 after that?

   There is inexhaustible demand for free San Francisco condos. A policy of “free housing with no conditions” is financially unsustainable and has a magnet effect on troubled people from elsewhere. Permanent housing is a precious thing; it should be allocated based on sobriety and proper care of the property.

6. Free and Available Drug Treatment - If someone is ready for rehab, we MUST be ready to provide it. San Francisco should be a place where people who want to get clean can get the help they need.