FOOL ME TWICE — For some San Francisco city officials, Gov. Gavin Newsom's veto of a state-backed safe drug injection site means it's time to take matters into their own hands. Doing so could get tricky. Senate Bill 57 — which the governor vetoed this week, fueling speculation about his broader ambitions — would have created pilot programs in Oakland, San Francisco in Los Angeles. The Democratic governor nixed the legislation, citing concerns about the unintended consequences of "unlimited" sites where people can consume illegal drugs under the supervision to prevent and reverse overdoses. Backers of the bill were frustrated to have, once again, come so close to state approval only to have their hopes dashed. The bill has come up every year since 2016. Newsom said he'd maybe consider it again in the future (after another study and additional safeguards) but some say they're not willing to wait — and they may not have to. Enter the New York model. Last year, the nation's most populous city voted to allow non-profit organizations to run two safe injection sites, absent any action from the state. Advocates hail the New York City sites as a big success — the nonprofit told NPR in June they've saved 300 lives since opening in November. Following news of Newsom's veto, San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said he'd support instituting a non-profit model like the one in New York. And thanks to an ordinance passed a few years ago, San Francisco is already set up to do so. In 2020, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously in favor of allowing non-profit organizations to operate supervised injection sites. Mayor London Breed has long been in favor of the approach, and this week said the city will "keep working with our community partners to find a way forward, and we will also continue to advocate to the federal government about this critical public health response." It's not clear what, if anything, the state would do in such a scenario. Newsom's office on Wednesday said it has "nothing to share" on the matter. California Attorney General Rob Bonta's office said it was "unable to provide legal advice or analysis on specific cases that have yet to occur." State intervention may not be the problem, however. Even though the city authorized the practice, it's still illegal under federal law. That created some problems for other cities that tried to do this during the Trump administration. In 2019, when a nonprofit in Philadelphia tried to open the nation's first supervised injection site, federal prosecutors immediately stepped in, saying it would violate a 1980's portion of the Controlled Substances Act that outlaws the operation of buildings for the purpose of using drugs. President Joe Biden hasn't taken an affirmative position on injection sites, but it's notable that his administration didn't step in when New York opened its locations. The Justice Department under Biden has signaled it could be amenable to the sites , and in February said it was in settlement talks with the Philly nonprofit.
|
Comments
Post a Comment