Soon after Lydia Bransten, the executive director of the Gubbio Project, laid out the ground rules for Wednesday night’s meeting on already-approved tiny homes in the Mission, an attendee shouted out an angry response. Within seconds, he and Bransten were nose to nose.
That tense exchange at St. John the Evangelist Episcopal Church sums up the passionate opinions regarding the 60 cabins that will go up at 1979 Mission St., where roughly 68 homeless adults will temporarily live.
Though at first it appeared that dissenters equalled the supporters, as the night wore on, an increasing number of speakers who support the site stepped forward. Some parents from nearby Marshall Elementary School said they view the cabins as a teaching lesson for kids’ compassion; business neighbors voiced approval.
In February, Supervisor Hillary Ronen promised to reject the cabins until personally ensuring their safety, so residents were shocked to learn that she had pivoted and the city had quietly approved the project. It breaks ground in two weeks.
Ronen defended the decision on Wednesday, citing the Mission’s homelessness issue and overwhelmed resources. And, she offered new safety measures meant to address residents’ concerns about homeless “spillover” and worsened street conditions, specifically near neighboring Marshall Elementary School.
Outbursts, accusations of “lies” and booing occasionally interrupted Ronen and city department officials. The majority of the two-hour meeting was reserved for public comment, some aimed at Ronen’s decision to move the project along.
“I want you to put ‘Project Hillary’ on top of that, so we know who robbed us,” a resident named Jay said.
And a sizable portion of speakers still felt the Marshall students, some of whom were in tow Wednesday, would be endangered by the site. “It’s next to our kids,” one mom said, asking why it could not be done elsewhere.
The city, Ronen promised earlier, will hire a Director of Mission Streets Condition to observe 1979 Mission St. and the area surrounding Marshall. The director will call any appropriate city department in “real-time” if and when issues arise, Ronen promised. Additionally, the city will powerwash the streets and offer homeless residents shelter.
The director will work under the Healthy Streets Operation Center, a city entity that offers shelter to homeless individuals and clears encampments.
This, however, failed to assuage some. “We have people defecating on the street, selling illegal goods. Having somebody walking around or, you know, around the neighborhood isn’t going to fix all of the issues,” said one 15th Street resident.
“Do I get a commitment that it will be an encampment-free radius from the facility?” The same woman yelled at the city leaders after her time to speak was up. None responded.
Ronen explained earlier that the cabin project will have just “one” entrance and exit on Mission Street, not at Capp Street near Marshall. Architects promised a “buffer” between the community area and the site, including two fences and storage units in between. The tiny homes will be staffed and operated by a nonprofit contractor, and have round-the-clock camera surveillance.
“I want you all to know, for me, I feel comfortable now looking you all in the eye and saying that this is going to make the neighborhood better,” Ronen said.
Saba Moussavian, who lives near the project and was a health outreach worker at 33 Gough St., shared “how powerful it feels to see clients who I’ve worked with at 33 Gough.”
The cabins could be life-changing, formerly homeless people suggested. Thanks to resources, “I survived,” said Angelica Chavez in Spanish, who had stayed at 33 Gough. “On Friday, I’m moving into my first apartment,” she said, to roaring applause.
Members of the American Indian Cultural District, which is near the site, echoed how indigenous people were disproportionately affected by homelessness and could use the services.
The tiny homes will be guaranteed for Mission residents experiencing homelessness — a big sell to Ronen and many attendees, who see the site as a way to get people safely off the street. Emily Cohen, spokesperson for the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, said 7,700 San Franciscans are homeless on any given night, and the last point-in-time count showed a 55 percent jump in the Latinx homeless population.
Indeed, just while waiting to enter Wednesday’s meeting on Julian Street, residents lined up by a homeless man sleeping soundly on a couch. Two tent encampments were pitched around the corner.
The cabins are modeled after those at 33 Gough St., a pilot homeless village viewed by the city as a success. Ronen and Julia Lowry, a principal architect with the Department of Public Works, noted how navigation centers at Embarcadero Center or Central Waterfront improved nearby homeless situations, and even won over previously critical residents.
Construction on the $5.7 million project will begin the first week of November and finish next spring. The per-cabin cost to operate will be $135 a day, which is equal to or less than other shelters, Cohen said.
In the end, the decision to move ahead had already been approved and Ronen and others could do little more than promise oversight.
“I very much understand the fear and the skepticism of leaders and parents at Marshall Elementary,” Ronen said at the meeting’s conclusion. “I will work nonstop to make sure that this tiny home community is a benefit to the individuals … and to the entire community.”
Latest News
Loading…
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Of the many Pro cabin attendees– with all their idealistic talk of empathy and goodwill towards the homeless population of SF, how many are willing to take one of these folks into their home? We only need 60! then we could save millions of dollars on an, as of yet unproven method to get folks out of homelessness.
In February, Ronen promised the parents and neighbors in the IMMEDIATE vicinity of Marshall Elementary that she would ONLY approve the project if she could guarantee street conditions in the area would be improved– 8 mos. later conditions are still terrible. We still have feces, broken windows and unmitigated open air fentanyl use less that 1000 ft. from a school (Drug-free school zoning laws) . In fact many of the people that come to the neighborhood to do drugs are from OTHER tiny home villages Like Mission Street Service at 165 Capp street.
Currently there is no accountability of the myriad of groups ALREADY in the neighborhood serving these people, why should we believe that Ronen would accept any accountability for what happens to the neighborhood once this project goes through? After all her term is over and she’s off to Spain in less than a year. Thanks for NOTHING Ms. Ronen.
Why would the measure of compassion be taking a stranger into one’s home?
What’s your proof that people from “OTHER tiny home villages” come to the Mission to do drugs? (BTW, 165 Capp IS in the Mission.)
Because I spoke with a few of them when they were camped in front of my house. That’s how.
Neigbhbors supported 156 Capp at the time because “there are already homeless people here, right?”
Turns out that 156 Capp is a magnet that turned the 100 block of Capp into a fetid, squalorific permanent encampment when it was not previously.
seems to me that many continue to use our ‘children’ as a trope to stop solutions for people living on the streets. mission residents also appear have the disposable time and income to oppose any solution (much like the navigation center on the embarcacdero).
anyone want to ask the ‘children’ walking to the boys and girls club on jones street whether they are at risk from all the homeless people leaning up against the buildings?
get over yourselves.
Unfortunately this project is likely to make the neighborhood even less safe. I doubt that the Latino families who live in that area want their kids walking by this new “village” of drug addicts and homeless every day, although I guess it can’t get much worse.
Mike,
The Homeless are not all drug addicts.
I did a story on Marshall a couple of years back and given its demographic I’d bet there are at least 50 homeless kids going there.
Why not put these children’s families there for temporary housing as Horace Mann has done?
Don’t expect help from the District as they hate the success of that project.
You’re worried about them seeing Homeless people they are Homeless themselves ?
“Unfortunately this project is likely to make the neighborhood even less safe.”
What are you basing that comment on?
Giving people housing is a great idea, but unless the people are invested in the home, it will fail. People care about things they have worked for, not free things. And I did not see anything in this article addressing the chronic problems of addiction and mental health. Without this, the concerns about safety are well founded and seem to be brushed aside.
So as if we do not create, at minimum, shelter.
You cannot teach investment without investment, as they do not have anything except rock bottom.
What do you hope to extract from them?
And the chronic problems of “investment” are for HSH and DPH to figure out, it’s their job to manage it, which it is.
There are 4K un sheltered homeless. So it’s gonna take 67 more meetings and hemming and hawing from supervisors like Ronen to get them off the streets.
I’m a neighbor and approve,
My dog and I clean the streets 7 days a week from 14th and Valencia.
Manny’s has been huge positive influence and draws thousands to his Community Center.
Sam Dodge’s Navigation Center was a huge success across the street.
Hillary is a rock star who takes lots of abuse as is her husband, Francisco who is head of Mano Raju’s Immigration Section defending the poor at our Public Defender’s office.
Hopefully Alex Tourk who is also working on Tiny Homes can be involved.
For Security the Mayor can force Police Kobans in at least one corner here and at my 16th and Mission stomping grounds.
I was born and raised in successful duplex Public Housing in St. Louis.
It was successful because only ‘you’ went through your front door from the street.
I still like Lerma as her replacement and he can enter as late as next July and win.
Niners loss was good for a good team.
h.
Can anyone organize disorganized chaos? that is the question.
“where roughly 68 homeless adults will temporarily live.”
So where are they going to go after the ‘temporary’ time ends? Sounds more like a dream band aid that a viable long term solution will materialize during this ‘temporary’ period.
We can keep going with all the “whataboutisms” or we can get 68 people off the street.
This was the same case made for Navigation Centers, limited to 90 day stays. Navigation Centers have only successfully navigated people to Homeward Bound in any numbers, small as they may be.
It is not “getting people off of the streets” if they’re given temporary places to stay and end up back on the streets eventually.
This is what money laundering looks like, monetizing human misery over time while playing the every note on the Wurlitzer of nonprofity guilt tripping at critics.
Whenever people who are getting paid lay guilt trips on those who are not to do more of what pays them, then that’s a form of extortion.
Drug cabins for all and no true help for the un-housed or rights residents and home owners!
Ronen has dishonestly rammed this project down our throats. Despite her assurances that she would not pursue this encampment without neighborhood support, she went ahead and pulled “ministerial permits,” which do not require notification and cannot be appealed. Then she put on a dog and pony show, also without neighborhood notice, which was stacked with nonprofit representatives. These people have the most to gain in terms of lucrative city and state funding and no-bid contracts.
The nonprofit reps played the consummate victims and shamed anyone who dissented. They accused speakers of arrogance, privilege, racism, and entitlement. Emotion won out, as it always does in San Francisco. The project is full steam ahead.
Moreover, the city assured us that these cabins will not go to working families, teachers, or others who need a leg up. Rather, they will go to the Mission’s hard-core street campers, for “whom nothing else has worked,” according to the Department of Emergency Management spokesman.
Thanks a lot, Hillary Ronen, for continuing to assure the Mission’s place as a containment zone. It is a star in your firmament.
So many inspiring calls for supporting our marginalized were made last night and next to none of them are quoted here. Super disappointed in this reporting.
The dais was a packed with NIMBY decision makers who would never accept such a project in their neighborhoods.
I wonder what the cost was for all of those city funded NIMBY nonprofit staffers to overpower neighborhood residents to speak in favor of a project that was already a done deal?
I could see a full court press if there were an action item on the agenda. But this was an expression of the NIMBY contempt with which Mission nonprofits have long shown North Mission residents, as if our neighborhood is their free fire zone.
Are they wanting this contract to replenish their coffers in anticipation of the 2024 election? Odds are that after gerrymandering’s effects are felt electorally, most of these nonprofit operators will find themselves high and dry. Breed is already yanking their chains slow walking funding. Remember that Campos could not break the default 40% bench against Haney. Mahogany lost to a cop running a neoliberal identity politics campaign. The political weather has only worsened for the progressive residue since.
Nobody wants an AIPAC supervisor, but if the nonprofit racketeers are the alternative, having severed their connection to residents, and the alt right spends lavishly, then that becomes a real possibility.
The response to me heckling Ronen as a liar and Dodge as a NIMBY was instructive. At the outset of the meeting, Cohen stated their meeting ground rules. I rose to demand neighborhood ground rules: all speakers need to disclose whether they live in the immediate area of the project, whether they are Marshall families, and whether they work for the City or a funded nonprofit.
The Church Lady tried to police me, saying that this public meeting was on private property and that she’d have me removed. I dared her to try.
After that, Lerma and several nonprofiteers tried to engage me to dissuade me from raining on their choreographed parade of contempt for residents, and I just heckled them as well.
At one point, I did not see this, my husband did, two younger nonprofity men had established themselves behind my chair and began menacing me physically. I did not notice as I was paying attention to who to heckle next.
I guess that like injured, cornered animals, city funded Mission nonprofiteers facing funding oblivion are dangerous, need to intimidate even when it is in no way consequential.
Once the decisionmakers had finished, I had no interest in playing the ritual role of powerless submitting to power, and there was no reason to heckle relatively powerless people, so we left.
Heckling always gets the job done! Ranting & raving comes in second. Posting how well you’ve done comes in third.
The deal was done, she was rubbing residents’ nose in it. All that remained was to publicly humiliate the liar and to get under the skin of their cosa nostra.
That sounds like quite the spectacle. Is there a video of this somewhere?
I don’t think so. The interesting video would have been of the Church Lady, Lerma and nonprofiteer gangsters trying to intimidate and harass me.
Thank you Supervisor Ronen for working tirelessly in trying to address the encampment situation. This is a great step forward in providing shelter to those on the street that are in need. In the vacuum of mayoral leadership on this issue you are providing real solutions. I’m sorry you have to put up with the rude and unsociable behavior from those at the meeting and in the in comments here who just choose to attack you and offer nothing in the way of solutions.