Karina Ortiz, a 26-year-old living in the Salvation Army Harbor House homeless shelter with her husband and seven-year-old daughter, will be evicted in March,ย the same month that she is due to give birth to a baby boy.ย
On the morning of Jan. 21, Ortiz stood in Room 200 of City Hall, joined by a half-dozen other families also facing eviction. The group handed a staffer a letter demanding a meeting to address their urgent needs, and asking the mayor to rescind the evictions.
These families all received an eviction letter with the operative date of Feb. 8 or 10, about three weeks away. Ortiz managed to get a one-month reprieve.
The eviction notices came as a result of a change in policy from the San Francisco Department of Homeless and Supportive Housing in December. Under the new policy, homeless families are now only permitted to stay in city shelters for 90 days; previously, they could stay indefinitely. For families unable to get housing subsidies, this will put them back on the street.
โWe share the desire to move out of the shelters and into more stable housing,โ the families stated in the letter to the mayor, signed by The Recently Arrived Families Committee of Faith in Action Bay Area. โBut an eviction letter with no plan and no options for where to go means we could end up on the street with our children.โย
โAt a time when the new federal administration is causing so much fear, we are disappointed that your local administration is also causing fear,โ the letter reads.
This policy change is not new: It reinstates the 90-day time limit for families in city shelters that was in place prior to the Covid-19 pandemic. Deborah Bouck, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeless and Supportive Housing, said the city suspended the stay limit to โstabilize the community and support people during unprecedented times.โ
Under the policy adopted in December, if a family needs more time after reaching 90 days in the shelter, the shelter can authorize up to three extensions of 30 days each,ย based on the family’s circumstances. Additional extensions can also be authorized by the department, based on family circumstances.ย
Bouck said that the policy change is aimed at developing “key reforms to the family homelessness response system.โ The policy change would give priority to people who are experiencing street homelessness, disability or pregnancy, fleeing domestic violence, or those who have been homeless before.ย
It is unclear how many families have received the notices across the city, according to Matt Alexander, the communications director for Faith in Action Bay Area, which organized todayโs demonstration. But Faith in Action has heard from eight families who have received the notices, Alexander said. And families are still spreading the word across shelters.
Alexander also said that none of the eviction notices so far have been issued from the department; all are from individual shelters.
Nathalie Hrizi, a vice president of theย United Educators of San Francisco teachersโ union, also tagged along with the families at City Hall. Hrizi said she heard about the evictions last week and was โupset, angry and frustrated.โ
Some 2,403 San Francisco public school students are homeless, according to the school district’s 2023 report, which accounts for 4.3 percent of the 55,452 students enrolled that year.ย
San Francisco has 405 families โ 1,103 people โ experiencing homelessness, according to the cityโs 2024 point-in-time count. That number is likely an undercount, however, as the count is not an accurate measure of all homeless people in the city.
Still, that number was almost double that in 2022, when the department reported only 605 people in 205 families who identified as homeless.
โI’m very worried, because we don’t have any place to go,โ said Maria Zavala, a 37-year-old mother of three children, in tears. Zavala’s family is living off of her husband’s biweekly garbage collector salary of $1,300. The family of five is cramped in a room with two sets of bunk beds. She said she can’t work because she needs to take care of her disabled six-year-old daughter full-time.ย
โWith everything my daughter is going through, I just can’t see ourselves [living] in the street.โ
The interviews were conducted in Spanish with translation from Cathy Peronius, a volunteer at Faith in Action Bay Area, and from Matt Alexander.
SF homeless policy from the beginning under Lady Di Fi: alternate periods of benign neglect with malign neglect. This is a period of malign neglect. Those evicted will get a choice: either accept a free bus ticket to some other sidewalk in some other city, or get thrown in jail.
There is no reason why human beings should be homeless. Open up the housing authority again, so they can relate low housing homes. Start using these empty buildings for housings. S.F. and every other city can do better if they want. The money is not being used for the homeless shelters for people. The money is being put in greedy politicians pockets. It’s time to put your money where your mouth is! No family should be living outside or having children in the streets!
I wish that half of what you recommend was real and doable. “start using these empty buildings for housing”….someone owns those buildings, how do you suggest gaining access to those buildings? “Open up the housing authority again”….with what? the department has to have the funding to offer the vouchers to the low income….and just because more low income people get housing vouchers does not directly correlate to the homeless as we who do the work know more “at risk of homeless” obtain those vouchers than those that are in the throes of hoemlessness, additionally just because there are more vouchers out there does not mean they are directly usable as many people do not want to offer their properties for rent to people with housing vouchers like Section 8 or Shelter + Care.
The problem is that unlike a lot of places that build small/cheap apartments for working class people who have issues (e.g. women who โcanโt workโ as she is taking care of her disabled 7 year old girl, and they canโt live on her husbandโs garbageman pay aloneโฆ). The United States in general, and San Fransisco in particular will not allow the building of small apartments. Build a lot of 300-500 sq foot places, that can be provided at very low rents. This is what the world does, we canโt solve this problem by building 1200+ sq ft โlow incomeโ housing.
300 sq ft apartment is not appropriate for a family. I’ll bet your kitchen is bigger than that.
Have you been in a well designed 300 foot apartment? Or a 500 foot one?
I have been in many. Hong Kong, Japan, New York, London. I could go on.
Families live in efficiency apartments all over the world which are this size. And in some places (Japan, home Kong come to mind) even middle class families live in these type of spaces.
And these places donโt have the homeless problems as badly as we do, as cheaper housing is available.
How does suspending the indefinite stays “stabilize the community and support people during unprecedented timesโ???
Need those spots for the vagrant, young, drug addicted men moving here from Ohio who would otherwise be shooting up in Whole Foods bathrooms.
LOLโฆ sad but true.
How about birth control and working instead of subsidies. Feel free to take them in.
Katie,
I’d offer anyone arrested for anything from shoplifting to murder $10,000 to get sterilized plus if they’re homeless a grand a month for a year to get straight.
I’m a retired Reform School teacher and this is the most direct way to reduce our criminal population.
The numbers don’t lie and the Revenge approach to Crime Control ends up creating more criminals and the Revenge Policy Movement has won at the polls from Trump down to our own Daniel Lurie who is reminding me of Jerry Brown.
go Niners !!
h.
We have received a eviction also I have a sick mom a son who is in kindergarten and a 2 yr old son we were approved for permanent
Supportive housing but there telling me because I’m not actively looking for a home it doesn’t qualify as a subsidy also my mom just got a worker for her disability from capp program we are below 50 on the supportive permanent housing list and have no were to go .and there not giving any resources to help me also running from domestic violence.thats how we got here..I’m scared
I hope that you get housing. Please, please, please please do not have any more kids until you are older and safe and in a stable economic, emotional, and psychological situation. Do not have any more kids. Do not have any more kids. You deserve help and you deserve a good life. You have to stop having kids when you can’t afford them. Stop being desperate for attention from any man that shows you a bit of attention. You have to be strong.
That’s really smart to have another child when you are living in a homeless shelter.
I am being sarcastic. It’s incredibly stupid and incredibly irresponsible.
I want to have compassion and I have some compassion, but how can people be so incredibly irresponsible? There are free condoms everywhere. It’s not that hard to exercise a basic level of common sense and to prevent a second child while you are living in a shelter. People need to do better. Do better for your existing child. The more stress you create, the greater likelihood that your life will become even more unmanageable and your current child will suffer. I hope you are reading this. Please do better.
And Iโm sure your entire life has been that of a moral, upstanding individual devoid of any faults or shortcomings, and with a brilliant ability to foresee all upcoming circumstances you find yourself subjected to. Good on you. Maybe you should write a book about how others, far more โstupidโ than you, should live as immaculately as you do.
Boo. Class apartheid is alive and well in SF.
Agree! But when people have very low level of education even the things that seem so common sense by most of us are not by these folks. It’s sad, but it is the consequence of poor education. Especially poor sexual education which tends to be blocked by some religions and conservative groups.
You’re not saying the same thing about yuppies in Noe Valley. It shouldn’t depend on your income how many kids you’re allowed to have.
Allegra, you can’t be this absurd. Of course child-rearing depends on your income. Children cost money. Why are you pretending to be unaware of this? The financial health of a person is 10000000% relevant when contemplating unprotected sex. That’s a fact of life. If people are irresponsible, a human being may be born into the actual world.
If having the child confers citizenship rights that other members of the family donโt have (thereby setting them up for immigration to the US, albeit much later), it actually makes a lot of sense. And I think most of the families in the shelter and sensible people doing what they perceive is the best thing for themselves.
What is see here is illegal immigrants bringing their children, no education, no understanding of the English language and on top of that while homeless, getting pregnant to have a US born baby to force the government to let them stay? This behavior is disgusting.. Homeless Veterans are still homeless, served our country and fought for our freedom. That is respect! Not coming in the backdoor and demanding a handout.
I cannot wait till you see what this attitude will do to you, the nation and the economy. I think your comment is vile and shows a lack of empathy or humanity.
Life in the U.S. is not fair. Different groups are treated differently. Experiencing homelessness can happen to anyone. Commenters here would do wise to reflect on those realities.
There are many people who are opposed to both abortion and birth control. The Catholic Church forbids either and many people who are either from Latin American culture are opposed to family planning for this reason. My family is traditional catholic italians who had many children they could not afford for this reason. These are also very patriarchal cultures where wives have no say in family planning. You have as many children as you have. Period. My mother had 8 children because thatโs what my father wanted. She did not. Has little to do with intellectual level.
Reading the hateful comments on this thread has made me decide I need to never read the comments here again. So much hate and selfishness makes me sick.
It does not stop here. Documented and undocumented need housing as everyone else. Bandage is temporary permanent HUD.
What resources are there for me to help these families ? How can I help ?
I have mixed feelings about this. First, before we can comment on this, we should try to understand how the system is set up for people experiencing homelessness. First, you need a housing assessment score of at least 93 to even qualify for CAAP Housing (or permanent supportive housing, as some of us know it). 123 and above give you priority. For anything below a 93, you have to do “problem-solving,” which means you have to look for your housing. To get a high score you have to be homeless for a long time (chronically homeless), DV survivor, drug user, and have mental and physical health issues. In other words, if you are someone who has a job, does not use drugs, and it is your first time being homeless, you will most likely be on your own.
Second, for families, while they do have government assistance programs for families, which is the only one immigrants can utilize, many of the housing options in the system, if they were to even qualify to begin with, do not allow more than one person to reside in. We have couples in the system that takes them more than a year to secure a unit through the CAAP housing system for both of them to live in.
Third, I cannot see why they would start with families first. The logic could have been that since all families universally qualify for benefits, it would be easier for them. Still, when you consider the housing assessment, they would not be able to keep their kids under their custody if they were to get a high score. Sure, they can lie, but then they risk CPS being called on them.
It would make more sense if they did a soft rollout for individuals denied more than one housing offer. People deny them because what they want is essentially subsidized luxury housing, which is unrealistic (I am simplifying it here; there are many reasons, from wanting to avoid the TL to not wanting an SRO or shared housing even though they get their rooms). People denying permanent supportive housing offers hold up the system, but not families.
Again, I can see the logic behind why they started with families. However, once you familiarize yourself with the system, you will understand why it is not as easy for families to get housing. While I understand the frustration some people may feel with having children in shelters, I would suggest not judging them. I do worry about how kids may develop chronic homelessness issues by growing up in shelters. Still, there is only so much families can do nowadays compared to single individuals who can get housing offers in less than 6 months as long as their situation is dire enough and they work to make things happen. If the city genuinely wanted to keep families moving through the system, they would not be banning RVs, which would result in them ending up in shelters and opening up units that are eligible to house families. Sure, multi-generational families have made it work in SROs. It may be arguable that it is a safer environment for kids in comparison to shelters, especially congregate (assaults of all kinds are common in shelters, just generally speaking). Still, we should try our best to find a better solution other than kicking them out of the curve or stuffing them into a one-bedroom. We could help them by opening up more safe RV sites so they can maintain their stability. At the same time, the city figures out how to house them, and hopefully, it creates a different queue for people who are not unstable in comparison to those who tend to qualify for cheap and priority housing.
How did the number of homeless families double in a time where rents are down and for about half the period evictions were halted? How are these families entering the system?
Did they know at least 9-months ago that they would get an Eviction Notice?
Subsized housing for families should be in place. Someone, must be working, receiving disability, monies from somewhere. To pay rent. As for being pregnant. This woman might have already been, prior to being housed in a shelter. The economy is bad. Many people are being laid.
Presumably these folks have been there for quite a bit longer than 90 days. During that time they have been receiving free or drastically reduced housing as well as other services.
If they canโt make it work here, then perhaps they should try to live somewhere with better job opportunities and cheaper housing.
Love how people with nothing continue to increase their kids.
Everyone has a different way they become homeless. Who are you to condemn those whose stories you don’t know?
With the mother’s full time job, the father’s two full time jobs, free housing, free food, TANF, WIC, AFDC, SNAP, MediCal, and free day care at Head Start, how can they not afford their expenses? In fact, what are they even paying for?
Oh, that’s right. We’re paying for it.
Wow. Nothing brings out the mouth-breathers and the bigots more than a story about what commenters have decided are the wrong kind of people.
Yeah I agree, they have money saved up and living the rent free life. SF has too many programs for people claiming homelessness, that’s why people want to bus here for the programs.
If you are illegal, you are going back home with kids in tow…
It must be hard be homeless ; however, long term free housing handouts are not ok.
Many single homeless live in city paid hotels for 7 k / month . They do drugs and never get a job . I done paying my taxpayer donation to addicts who can get high all day and never get a job
No accountability no incentive .
Now that is wrong.
The whole system and costs in SF for handling the homeless is a mess .
If from here and cannot prove it with documents reviewed by government , not the homeless coalition bs, then temp housing should be provided .
If they cannot find work here then they need to go where they can work like the rest of us .
I support birthright citizenship.
BUT this story perfectly explains why someone might oppose it. One anchor baby, coming up, from a family that came here to have an anchor baby and live on government handouts.
The very term “anchor baby” is a racist slur. Using it marks you as a bigot (which is also supported by the way you talk.)
Why do you have so many children if your husband only makes 2600 a month. That salary s not enough to take care of one adult human let alone five. I doubt making more money before so why would you have three children when y’all can’t take care of yourself in San Francisco where the cost of living is so high.
Wait…. having a second kid while living off the tax payer?!
Average rent for 1 bd apartment in Bay Area: $2500. Possible to find something near $2000.
Two people working full time making near minimum wage $18 x 40 x 4 x 2 = $5760 or $4,600 per month after taxes. And that’s on the lower end.
Most people won’t be homeless if they tried to but then again it’s SF government enabling this mooching behavior.
They’re taxpayers, too, and have likely paid for years into the system that fails them now.
Hilarious that you think you can find a 1bd apartment for $2000.
Campers,
They’re here because they are the latest generation victimized by White Christian American Foreign Capital which began on the North American continent by murdering around 25 million indigenous people and stealing their land and culture.
Once that was done the White Christian Imperialist Venture Capitalists turned their attention South and have murdered millions and stolen their resources and murdered their leaders and installed dictators to terrorize them and keep them docile.
I wake up every morning and turn on the light powered by electricity running through copper wires with copper stolen from Chile and have a banana stolen from the people of Guatemala where we also murdered their leader and made their lives hell.
These people at our borders are the Offspring starving victims of American White Capitalist Imperialism.
Trump says he’ll send in the Marines again but this time to fight the gangs.
Americans improving living conditions for our victims ?
Very interesting.
go Niners !!
h.
Our country is in the gutter and being irresponsible and putting more children in the system should be punishable. Yep, most likely illegal n ppl are upset about changing birthright citizenship??. We have more homeless than ever thanks to uneducated, unqualified, stupid ppl having run the country in the crapper. Im sorry, when u break the law to come here and the states r broke I want my tax dollars going to the elderly american citizens n Vets that r homeless. Americans are angry and things will change!!! Common sense first!
PS n Im here legally!!
It is a new day w a new President and new immigration policies..if you are able bodied and here legally then you need to work..if you are illegal its time to reconsider returning to your home country..We are done paying for freeloaders living on taxpayer funds
The Mayor had already started the path of saving money. Removing free rent is a good first step. From what I read, some of these families do have income, that just means you shouldn’t be living in SF. A bus ride to somewhere else in the USA is a better choice. There’s no reason to want to live in one of the nation’s most expensive city. Like I mentioned to other people outside of here, the only reason homeless people want to come to SF is because of the free programs and benefits. Most of these homeless families aren’t even SF natives. I definitely think SF can take care of it’s own residents, not everyone else.
Where did these families come from?
You don’t mention whether or not they are illegal immigrants. But that matters.
If they’re not here legally, maybe they should go back to their own countries, rather than asking/demanding that San Francisco pay their expenses.
Or maybe these families don’t have to live in one of the most expensive cities on the planet?
I would not show up in Aspen, Davos, Aruba, London or Manhattan and expect the local taxpayers to pay for free housing for me.
Trump’s America now! The gravy train is over. No more free rides. I’m guessing these people are immigrants and will most likely be deported back to their country. Won’t be a drain in the taxpayers any longer.
Hilarious that you think we are draining taxpayer money on these sorts of issues. I only wish that were true. How about the literal BILLIONS of dollars we are sending to Israel to continue to create more refugees. Or the BILLIONS of unaccounted waste at the Pentagon, just disappears into thin air I guess.
Or the BILLIONS of unaccounted waste at the Homeless Industrial Complex, that just disappears into thin air. 24 billion for vagrants, budget cuts for fire fighters.