This is an archive of a past election.|
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/sf/ for current information.
Free and Low-Cost Substance Abuse Treatment Programs
City of San Francisco
Ordinance - Majority Approval Required
Pass: 200,649 / 61.24% Yes votes ...... 127,014 / 38.76% No votes
Index of all Propositions
|Results as of Jan 24 10:41am, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (580/580)|
|Information shown below: Fiscal Impact | Yes/No Meaning | Arguments ||
Shall the City be required to provide enough free and low-cost substance abuse treatment services to meet demand and to maintain funding for such services?
The proposed ordinance would require the Department of Public Health to maintain an "adequate level of free and low cost medical substance abuse services" to meet the overall demand for these services. The City would be required to not reduce funding, staffing or the number of substance abuse treatment slots available for as long as slots are filled or sought. The proposed ordinance would establish a method for calculating overall demand for these services using the total number of filled substance abuse treatment slots plus the number of individuals seeking such slots. The proposed ordinance would require the Department of Public Health to provide an annual report to the Board of Supervisors of existing and unmet demand and a plan to meet the overall demand.
Approximately $50 million is budgeted for Fiscal Year 2008- 2009 to provide free and low cost medical substance abuse services, approximately 60% of which comes from the City's General Fund. These services are primarily delivered through contracts with local nonprofit organizations and the Department of Public Health spends approximately $3 million annually to administer the contracts. The Department of Public Health estimates that the cost of unmet demand for substance abuse services ranges from $7 million to $13 million above current spending levels.
The costs discussed above could increase or decrease depending on how the City implements the ordinance. Note that an ordinance cannot bind future Mayors and Boards of Supervisors to provide funding for this or any other purpose. Under the City Charter, the ultimate cost of this proposal depends on decisions made in the City's annual budget process.
League of Women Voters
|Arguments For Proposition T|
VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION T!
Since 1997, the Treatment on Demand Planning Council has been advising the citizens of San Francisco on ways to build a more effective, more cost-efficient, and a more equitable treatment system.
The Planning Council continues to be the best representation of citizen advocacy and community-driven participation as part of our City's effort in addressing the needs of its citizens.
As long-time advocates of San Francisco's alcohol and drug related problems, we support the Treatment on Demand Act, as a life-saving and cost-saving measure. We all know that treatment saves lives and saves families.
University medical studies shows that every dollar spent on treatment saves $7-$13 in public costs.
San Francisco has a good community-based treatment system. We need to make sure that it is available to everyone who needs it as soon as they are ready.
We believe that the Treatment on Demand Act will make San Francisco a better place to live.
Please join us in voting YES on Proposition T!
On behalf of the Treatment on Demand Planning Council,
Georgia Bates Creel & Richard E. Gee
(No arguments against Proposition T were submitted)