Mayor Daniel Lurie is proposing to more than double the capacity of a homeless shelter proposed for the Bayview last year, a move that District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton is calling “inequitable” and “unfair” because it “makes sure unhoused folks are warehoused in the southeastern part of San Francisco.”
“How are you going to expand something in Bayview Hunters Point when we’re talking about equitably providing shelter across the city?” asked Walton.
Last year, under Mayor London Breed, San Francisco leased a 2.25-acre industrial site at 2177 Jerrold Ave. in the Bayview to build a homeless village of 68 “tiny homes” and 20 RV parking sites. Tiny homes are a novel approach to homeless shelters, one Lurie himself touted while on the campaign trail, pointing to his nonprofit Tipping Point helping to build 70 of them at 33 Gough St. for about $34,000 each.
But it is unclear whether the homeless village will be built after all, according to Walton, whose district includes the site. Walton says that, in a meeting Monday, he was told by Lurie’s team that the mayor now wants to build a homeless shelter with “200-plus” homeless beds.
“It was supposed to be a hybrid, a mixture of folks living in tiny homes, living in vehicles,” said Walton, who also said he was told the RV parking spots would be eliminated. The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing, for its part, denied that, writing in a statement that “The claim that we’ve decided to eliminate all vehicle slots is inaccurate.”
Still, the Jerrold Avenue site may become one of the largest city-run shelters in San Francisco, in a district that has four other homeless shelters, including the 128-bed Bayshore Navigation Center just down the street.
Walton, for his part, said he wants to see Lurie push for shelters throughout the city, including “around Golden Gate Park, around the beach,” near Parkmerced and in other parts of the city.
“Show me the plan for them,” Walton said. “If it’s a San Francisco problem, why place folks disproportionately in one area?”
There are almost no city-run homeless shelters in the Westside. Most of the city’s shelters are in the Tenderloin, Mission, SoMa and Bayview. If built, 2177 Jerrold Ave. would also be on the larger side: There are just a few other city shelters with more than 200 beds.
District 10, however, also has a disproportionate share of the city’s homeless, according to the latest point-in-time count, about 18 percent of the city’s total. But it has about 12 percent of the city’s total shelters, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Lurie’s team did not immediately respond to requests for comment. On the campaign trail, Lurie pledged to build 1,500 homeless shelter beds across San Francisco and end street homelessness in six months, a promise that an adviser to Lurie has since admitted was a “slip-up.”
Lurie may have painted himself into a corner with the promise, said a City Hall source: Building that many beds requires maximizing density instead of prioritizing experimentation, as was the original vision for the Jerrold Avenue site.
Of particular issue to Walton is the removal of the RV parking spots. Bayview had a previous “safe parking site” for vehicles at Candlestick Park, until it was shuttered on Monday, with almost a year still left on its city lease. Residents were told to accept shelter elsewhere, leave, or be towed, and those interviewed by Bay City News “were uniformly scared and angry.”
Walton, for his part, said having another safe parking site in the neighborhood was a big reason he supported the closure of the Candlestick Park lot.
“Part of the reason I agreed to shutting down the Candlestick site was to have more support for folks living in vehicles at the Jerrold site, along with tiny homes,” Walton said, adding that the construction of the site was still no sure thing.
“What they think they can do and what the community accepts are different things,” he said. This outcome, Walton added, is one of the reasons he voted against Lurie’s ordinance in January to remove some Board oversight over city contracts dealing with drugs and homelessness to expedite them; Walton was the lone vote against the law.
“This is what I was afraid of,” he said.
Why does the Bayview always get dumped on? It’s outrageous to not spread homeless shelters around the city as Walton points out. It’s so unfair. The Bayview already has enough filthy streets, pollution, noise, poverty.
A homeless shelter is most affordable where land is affordable. If they have an existing building that can house more people what is the problem? You don’t want the capacity to get people off the streets, including Bayview streets? Sure they could use a Presidio building or a downtown office, but the expense would be massive and people would call it wasteful. You can’t please all parties.
Well Walton has been a BIG supporter of more services and more spending on the homeless. Homeless rights are a big part of his progressive views.
Having all but encouraged friendly treatment of the homeless, I’m a little surprised he does not want them in HIS district.
Am I missing something?
Given how the introduction of homeless cabins at 1970 Mission Tenderloinized 16th Street and Mission BART, I’d imagine that no other supervisor would consider siting such a facility in their districts.
When the City sends a message that a neighborhood is nothing but a dumping ground, the City is taken at its word and a predictable deterioration is guaranteed to ensue.
Always push back on adding shelter and housing (of any kind) for the homeless. When you get ready to blame Lurie for what he said and what’s been accomplished point the finger at the people who stopped things from happening (the supervisors).
And now we see how newbie Mayor Lurie will rule: without input from the public or San Franciscans. Without input from the eleven district supervisors who are the mayors of their diverse districts and must explain and apply these mayoral edicts to their constituents. Without transparency and accountability to the public press. Without oversight and independance from various commissions. Mayor “no comment” Lurie. Running San Francisco’s democracy like a corporation of a non-profit.
Campers,
The City should build 4 high quality RV/Tent Campgrounds inside the City.
A thousand slots each.
500 RV slots and 3,500 for tents.
2 on Treasure Island.
1 on half of Lincoln Golf Course next to Ft. Miley Veterans Medical Center.
1 on half of Hardin Golf Course which is controlled by MSB who bought the PGA along w/their SF deal.
Y’all who agree with me that improvements to AI created no doubt in SF will soon create wealth sufficient to provide a UBI to every citizen of first SF and then the USA and then the World and that it will happen first in SF and the New SF RV/Tent Campgrounds will make us some serious cash mostly on the cash solvent tourists spend in restaurants or in the 3 new Indian/SF Casinos at the Armory and the Twitter Building and the Cow Palace.
Yeah, how’s the bible describe my condition ?
“Your old men will see visions.”
lol