Abstract
Public policies are governmental actions implemented to help address issues facing the public or communities. San Francisco is currently facing water pollution brought by homeless population, which has increased in the city in the recent past. Rational-comprehensive approach for policy analysis is utilized to examine this public problem and help in constructing policy alternatives to address it. As part of the policy analysis process, homeless population, taxpaying public, city officials and the Environmental Protection Agency are identified as stakeholders involved in this public problem. Social context and governance context are discussed as the contexts for public policy formulation to address the water pollution issue in San Francisco. The reason for government involvement is moral/ethical reason while government management is the appropriate instrument and regulatory policy the appropriate policy typology. Using Political Systems Theory, the three policy alternatives to address this problem are environmental policy, increased funding for expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities, and establishment of water and sanitation programs for homeless people.

Introduction

Policy analysis is a term used to refer to different activities such as assessment of components of the policymaking process and evaluation of policy alternatives. During this process, information is collected and analyzed to clarify causes and impact of public problems in relation to policy alternatives. The analysis process focuses on determining the effect of using one or more policy alternatives to address the identified public problem. Given the multidisciplinary nature of policy alternatives, policy analysis incorporates ideas and techniques from different fields of study including economics, philosophy, sociology, and political science (Kraft & Furlong, 2015). To ensure effectiveness, policy analysis is carried out using different approaches that incorporate a series of steps. The use of such approaches is critical for public officials tasked with developing and implementing various kings of policies that are geared toward protecting citizens and enhancing the efficiency of government agencies.

One of the approaches used in policy analysis is the rational-comprehensive approach, which is a relatively more demanding method for analyzing policies. The rational-comprehensive approach or decision making model incorporates a series of analytical stages or steps. The first step in this process is defining and analyzing the problem. This stage focuses on identification of the public problem, where it exists, who and what it affects, and its major consequences. In addition, the first step in this process also clarifies the impact of policy action on the causes of the public problem. It is followed by the development of policy alternatives that could help address the problem. By this stage, policy action is deemed as a suitable measure for addressing the public problem and its causes. As a result, various policy alternatives to address the problem are constructed.

The nest stage in the rational-comprehensive approach for policy analysis is the creation of evaluative criteria. The criteria is created in relation to the problem and the policy alternatives identified in the previous stage. The evaluative criteria is also developed to help determine whether policy alternatives would be acceptable to the public as well as the effectiveness, equity, and social and political feasibility of the policy alternatives. Once the evaluative criteria is determined, the next stage in this approach to policy analysis is actual evaluation of the policy alternatives. At this point, the evaluate criteria is at hand as well as a list of possible policy actions to take. The actual evaluation of the policy alternatives is geared toward identifying the policy action that could generate the desired outcome. This phase of rational-comprehensive approach is also viewed as forecasting policy outcomes or evaluating impacts (Anderson, 2011). As part of the evaluation process, policy alternatives are presented based on their effectiveness, equity, and economic efficiency.

The final stage in the rational-comprehensive approach to policy analysis is drawing conclusions on the most desirable policy action. In this regard, the most suitable policy action in relation to the given circumstances and the evaluative criteria is identified. The conclusions also incorporate factors to be considered when selecting the policy action or alternatives. In most cases, policy analysts do not present a single policy alternative, but a summary of findings regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the identified policy proposals (Kraft & Furlong, 2015). This is largely because the choice of the most suitable policy action to address the problem is left to policymakers and the public.

Problem Statement

San Francisco experiences a water pollution problem brought by the homeless population who throw needles and waste into the sewer system. The city has already received an environmental notice of violation from the Environmental Protection Agency.

Background Information

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a notice of violation to San Francisco, California for breaching the Clean Water Act through permitting used needles to be thrown into the ocean (Eilperin, Dennis & Dawsey, 2019). The citation came at a time when California’s most valued beaches, rivers and streams are contaminated with levels of fecal bacteria (Almendrala, 2020). These levels of fecal bacteria exceed the established limits for environmental protection. In the letter by EPA, San Francisco water pollution problem is linked to the homeless population who have been allowed to throw needles and sewer waste into the ocean. As homeless people continue to throw waste into the ocean, the city has seemingly failed to appropriately operate and maintain its sewage collection and treatment facilities (Ho, 2019).

While the city’s officials contend that such waste are not flowing into the ocean en masse, the existing treatment facilities are ineffective to deal with these pollutants. The city’s homeless population are putting tremendous pollution into the ocean because of the storm sewer. Therefore, San Francisco is grappling with growing fecal contamination of the waterways by the homeless population. As one of the cities with the highest homeless population, fecal contamination of the waterways generates environmental protection and public health issues. Additionally, fecal contamination of San Francisco’s waterways worsens during rainy seasons. During such seasons, streets are swept into storm drains and affect the water system. Most of the street waste swept into storm drains during these seasons come from the huge population of homeless people in San Francisco. This generates additional demands and strain on San Francisco’s waterways. As a result, the city needs changes in its waste management system and treatment facilities to address the problem of needles and sewer waste thrown into the ocean by homeless people.

Stakeholders

This public problem involves several stakeholders as it affects different people in San Francisco. One of the stakeholders in this public problem is homeless population who are regarded as the source of waste thrown into the ocean or waterways. Homeless population is an important stakeholder in this issue because of their consideration as the cause of the problem. The second important stakeholders is the taxpaying public who are affected by water pollution. Taxpaying public expect policymakers in San Francisco to make decisions and implement policies that protect them and address their wellbeing. Water pollution problem affects the taxpaying public in San Francisco by increasing their risk to public health issues and environmental health issues.

City officials are the third stakeholders in this problem since they play a critical role in policy implementation. Currently, city officials deny the accusation that they have...…of water pollution (Boucher, 2013). In the new environmental policy, San Francisco should continue filtering waste through its sewage system. However, during periods of storms, storm water should be permitted to flow into rivers to avoid the leakage that occurs when such water is captured in combined systems and mixed with household sewage and other human waste. City officials would then enforce regulations requiring separation of household sewage and human waste from the city’s water treatment systems and facilities.

Alternative Two: Expansion of Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities

The second probable policy action that could address this problem is increasing funding toward expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities. This would require identifying the capacity of existing facilities vis-à-vis demands, especially during rainy seasons. Policy initiatives should then be developed to help address the gap between the capacity of the current facilities and demands. The policy should increase allocation of financial resources relating environmental protection to the development of new sewage collection and treatment facilities. Expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities would be suitable because existing facilities have been unable to handle waste flowing into the ocean en masse during rainy seasons. Expansion of these facilities would in turn result in increased capacity to handle waste, which will effectively reduce fecal contamination of waterways by homeless people in the City.

Alternative Three: Water and Sanitation Programs for Homeless People

Third, water pollution by homeless people can be addressed through implementing policies to promote the establishment of water and sanitation programs for these people. Pitzer (2019) states that California should implement policies that require local communities to establish minimum standards for water and sanitation for homeless people. Policies should promote the identification of ways to enhance water and sanitation for homeless people such as providing bathrooms. Additional measures that could be implemented in the policy as part of water and sanitation programs for the homeless is provision of free RV dump stations and sanitation services for encampments (Almendrala, 2020). Once such a policy is enacted into law, local municipalities and communities in San Francisco and other cities in the state should be required to adopt such projects or face fines. This would help ensure the enforcement of the regulation and reduce water pollution by homeless populations in the City.

Conclusion

Public policies are enacted to help address some of the major issues facing populations in a specific community. The enactment of a public policy requires information regarding the specific problem and an assessment of whether government intervention will improve the situation. As a result, policymakers engage in the process of policy analysis, which refers to different activities such as assessment of components of the policymaking process and evaluation of policy alternatives. The process of policy analysis entails collection and analysis of information to clarify causes and impact of public problems in relation to policy alternatives. While different approaches for policy analysis exist, rational-comprehensive approach was employed in this project. It incorporates a series of stages i.e. defining and analyzing the problem, developing policy alternatives, creating evaluative criteria, evaluating policy alternatives, and drawing conclusions.

San Francisco experiences a water pollution problem brought by the homeless population who throw needles and waste into the sewer system. The city has already received an environmental notice of violation from the Environmental Protection Agency. This problem comes at a time when the number of homeless people in the city continues to increase while fecal contamination of waterways has become widespread. The stakeholders involved in this public problem are the homeless population, the taxpaying public, City officials, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Given the nature of the…