Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFist)   Someone in San Francisco is making a killing on tent villages   (sfist.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Homelessness, Supportive housing, single tent-camping spot, Hotel, tent program, Safe Sleeping Villages, Hotels, insane costs  
•       •       •

3691 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Mar 2021 at 1:05 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



39 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-03-05 1:10:28 AM  
i am blessed not to be homeless
 
2021-03-05 1:10:39 AM  
By the looks of the yard fences drawn on the ground, I suspect Les Nessman is responsible.
 
2021-03-05 1:13:15 AM  
Look at the size of those spaces! You could get two units per lot. Double the profits. Do it!
 
2021-03-05 1:13:28 AM  
For such a convenient location that seems like a deal.
 
2021-03-05 1:18:29 AM  
To be fair, I'm paying almost $120 night and I don't have 24 hour security, meals, or bathroom maintenance included.
 
2021-03-05 1:19:10 AM  
Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?
 
2021-03-05 1:20:25 AM  
Jesus Christ just house them already
 
2021-03-05 1:23:40 AM  
San Francisco is spending in excess of $30,000 per year per homeless person and the problem is not getting solved.  Nothing the city is doing is meant to reduce the homeless population.   Basically, a bunch of people are making a lot of money on this and it is not in their best interest to find a solution.
 
2021-03-05 1:36:52 AM  

robodog: Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?


Are you being serious?
 
2021-03-05 1:43:02 AM  

robodog: Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?


Is there one security guard per tent? One cook per tent?
 
2021-03-05 1:46:56 AM  

whosits_112: robodog: Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?

Are you being serious?


Yes, those costs are almost identical to what it costs the federal government to house prisoners, the services being provided are pretty much equivalent but the feds house their people in areas with some of the lowest cost of living in the country. Doing the same thing in the highest cost of living city in the country and on a smaller scale is actually pretty darn good.
 
2021-03-05 1:47:32 AM  

robodog: whosits_112: robodog: Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?

Are you being serious?

Yes, those costs are almost identical to what it costs the federal government to house prisoners, the services being provided are pretty much equivalent but the feds house their people in areas with some of the lowest cost of living in the country. Doing the same thing in the highest cost of living city in the country and on a smaller scale is actually pretty darn good.


You must be braindead.
 
2021-03-05 1:57:34 AM  
Well, it's not freedom unless it costs a buck oh five.
 
2021-03-05 1:58:25 AM  
"The tent program, which has attracted its share of critics since the start of the pandemic, was a quick and dirty response to the need to shutter indoor shelters across the city to prevent COVID outbreaks.

Meanwhile, the tent program is giving temporary shelter to 314 people in 247 tents."

What are the odds that the indoor shelters only housed 314 people?
 
2021-03-05 2:08:49 AM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: "The tent program, which has attracted its share of critics since the start of the pandemic, was a quick and dirty response to the need to shutter indoor shelters across the city to prevent COVID outbreaks.

Meanwhile, the tent program is giving temporary shelter to 314 people in 247 tents."

What are the odds that the indoor shelters only housed 314 people?


Numbers from March 2020, before lockdown.

"In cities like SF, the number of at-risk people in city-provided housing is much higher than the number of homeless persons-over 9,500 in all. So rather than 8,000 or so originally estimated, SF should really be counting well over 17,000-but in this context the higher number is actually a good thing."

https://sf.curbed.com/2020/3/4/2115250​1/san-francisco-homeless-nhip-count-su​pportive-housing
 
2021-03-05 2:09:38 AM  
Compared to that national figure, SF's score is much better than one would expect, scoring 60.3 and landing in 174th place out of nearly 400 communities.  Of those people without permanent housing, over 2,400 lived in emergency shelters, which leaves 5,180 unsheltered.
 
2021-03-05 2:22:04 AM  
Just bus them across the bay to Oakland for them to deal with it. Problem solved.

/s
 
2021-03-05 2:28:12 AM  
JFC. I'm farking embarrassed to live here.
 
2021-03-05 2:57:28 AM  
This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.
 
2021-03-05 3:42:02 AM  
I don't know why we think it's cheaper to let people be homeless. It isn't. It isn't free. Giving them homes would be better. Of course that doesn't fix it for all the homeless. But that's besides the farking point. Don't want to hear it.
 
2021-03-05 4:02:05 AM  

bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.


This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.
 
2021-03-05 4:18:50 AM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.


Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.
 
2021-03-05 4:36:36 AM  
How can it possibly cost $5000 per month per tent? It's a vacant car park with squares painted on it. Even if they put up some lighting, CCTV and private security it wouldn't justify that price.
 
2021-03-05 5:20:54 AM  

drxym: How can it possibly cost $5000 per month per tent? It's a vacant car park with squares painted on it. Even if they put up some lighting, CCTV and private security it wouldn't justify that price.


I'm sure someone is being paid for what they could make with cars on that lot?
ALSO I'm sure they are paying for security and for people to boss people around.
We like to over complicate things. But. I'm sure there are half ass plausible explanations.
Never mind this is all to avoid giving people homes because some of those people don't want homes thus no one should get a home.
 
2021-03-05 5:20:54 AM  
Counter-point, especially for those commenters from Seattle:

I got into the habit of cleaning up after people, because Seattle had a trash problem and I saw a need for someone to pick that stuff up. I especially picked up after other, less responsible homeless people... eventually, I ended up paying $250 per month for a single room, shared bathroom.

While living in that place, I kept up the habit of cleaning up after the homeless camp that I had been a part of... that lasted all of two months. Any guesses as to why I quit? It wasn't people who were still homeless. It was natives of Seattle that convinced me to stop picking up after others.

Someone in a pretty, white Cadillac with gold trim kept slinging their empty Pepsi cans at me. Someone in my neighborhood threatened me with his pickup truck, actually stopping in front of me to raise the plow on the front and rev his engine when I was walking home... so I thought "You know what? If Seattle doesn't want a CONTRIBUTING member of society, then fark this place."

The worst part? Mr. Cadillac's already traded his ride in five times since I left. Cost of living keeps increasing in his city, but why should he care? He's got his, fark you.
 
2021-03-05 6:29:23 AM  

bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.


For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.
 
2021-03-05 7:02:02 AM  
I can't imagine, for $5000/mo, these people couldn't be given more appropriate digs. Sustainability is what it's all about, right? This can't be sustainable. But even if it were, it seems the city could do better with much less. At the very least, a shelter with a roof. The wet season is about to begin in Cali and a tent's water-resistance can only hold up for so long before you're respraying it with silicone. But you can only do that for so long before the fabric stops breathing all together and becomes like living in a garbage bag.

It's awesome SF is taking care of them, but it could be done a lot less boondoggle-ey.
 
2021-03-05 8:19:37 AM  

OgreMagi: San Francisco is spending in excess of $30,000 per year per homeless person and the problem is not getting solved.  Nothing the city is doing is meant to reduce the homeless population.   Basically, a bunch of people are making a lot of money on this and it is not in their best interest to find a solution.


That has been a problem in homeless care for a long time.  The shelters are very good at raising money, pay their top admin six figure saleries, staff with volunteers and then keep costs down by providing the minimum level service as possible and refusing to help people at their most desperate.

Hell some shelters actaully charge the homeless to stay there.
 
2021-03-05 8:28:18 AM  

whosits_112: robodog: whosits_112: robodog: Ok, so $191 per site, per day for 24x7 security, cleaning service, bathrooms, and 3 meals per day in the most expensive city in the country? That actually seems really reasonable. Oh, and it's cheaper than the alternative which was a giveaway to the struggling hotel industry but which was funded with dollars from a different set of pockets. What's the biatching about?

Are you being serious?

Yes, those costs are almost identical to what it costs the federal government to house prisoners, the services being provided are pretty much equivalent but the feds house their people in areas with some of the lowest cost of living in the country. Doing the same thing in the highest cost of living city in the country and on a smaller scale is actually pretty darn good.

You must be braindead.


Seriously.  Surely there are some shuttered big box stores in the area.  Add some basic showers to the bathroom, turn the lights and HVAC on and set the tents up indoors or come up with some other partitioning.
 
2021-03-05 9:40:21 AM  
Wait until they see how much the average cost of a prisoner is in CA
 
2021-03-05 9:50:02 AM  
Indoor shelters can cost millions of dollars to construct and operate, while affordable housing can cost at least $700,000 a unit. Both can take years to build in San Francisco. Chronicle

"Give them housing" people say. That $60,000/yr. "per unit" tent camp site suddenly seems cheap when you consider what it costs to build real housing for people in this market, which then needs to be subsidized further for people to afford rent. (Plus, the tent camps provide more services, collect data, and are paying people to provide support, at much less than six figures.) The hotel rooms people get are already built and probably generating income for their owners. None of this is as simple as it seems. People need a standard income, for starters.
 
2021-03-05 10:51:04 AM  
Wondering how many of these people have family looking for them?...
 
2021-03-05 11:37:42 AM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.

For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.


Yes, covid sucks and liability is a biatch.  A third of the homeless in SF are homeless migrants from outside of SF.  You want SF to bear that burden solely?  Are you chipping in?
 
2021-03-05 1:35:56 PM  

mrparks: Look at the size of those spaces! You could get two units per lot. Double the profits. Do it!


Cut the spaces by two thirds and tell the homeless to sleep in shifts.
 
2021-03-05 5:54:18 PM  

bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.

For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.

Yes, covid sucks and liability is a biatch.  A third of the homeless in SF are homeless migrants from outside of SF.  You want SF to bear that burden solely?  Are you chipping in?


Nobody ever died of a communicable disease indoors before covid?
 
2021-03-05 6:28:30 PM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.

For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.

Yes, covid sucks and liability is a biatch.  A third of the homeless in SF are homeless migrants from outside of SF.  You want SF to bear that burden solely?  Are you chipping in?

Nobody ever died of a communicable disease indoors before covid?


I'm not sure if we have adequate documentation on what happened to homeless populations during the spanish flu pandemic
 
2021-03-05 6:46:34 PM  

bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality.  You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.

For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.

Yes, covid sucks and liability is a biatch.  A third of the homeless in SF are homeless migrants from outside of SF.  You want SF to bear that burden solely?  Are you chipping in?

Nobody ever died of a communicable disease indoors before covid?

I'm not sure if we have adequate documentation on what happened to homeless populations during the spanish flu pandemic


This. Is. So. Old.

The only things Covid-19 and the Spanish flu have in common is the last 2 digits of the years they passed through.

As in '19.
 
2021-03-05 6:55:37 PM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: This. Is. So. Old.

The only things Covid-19 and the Spanish flu have in common is the last 2 digits of the years they passed through.

As in '19.


I'm not sure if you noticed, but we're in a little bit different situation now than anything since 1918 as far as communicable diseases go
 
2021-03-06 2:19:08 AM  

bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: fark'emfeed'emfish: bhcompy: This is a skewed covid reality. You can't stick all these people in an auditorium with bunks and call it a day.

This is a Covid-skewed reality.

They're living in close proximity on the farking beach or under a bridge or something instead. No healthier than they'd be in an auditorium.

Looks like a decently setup tent city right here.

For 314 out of at least 2500 who were moved out of shelters. Another 5000 without shelter on top of that at the beginning of 2020. Scroll up for link.

Yes, covid sucks and liability is a biatch. A third of the homeless in SF are homeless migrants from outside of SF. You want SF to bear that burden solely? Are you chipping in?

Nobody ever died of a communicable disease indoors before covid?

I'm not sure if we have adequate documentation on what happened to homeless populations during the spanish flu pandemicThis. Is. So. Old.

The only things Covid-19 and the Spanish flu have in common is the last 2 digits of the years they passed through.

As in '19.

I'm not sure if you noticed, but we're in a little bit different situation now than anything since 1918 as far as communicable diseases go


You clearly didn't notice that was MY POINT.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.