SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#2So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either:
1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019)
2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them
3) the newsmedia are just printing stories about the homeless in SF more often because it gets clicks, and homelessness is not actually a worsening problem in SF
I would be curious to hear from any SF-resident HN readers as to their opinions on which of these options is more likely.
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#3So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either: 1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019) 2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them 3) the newsmedia are just printing stories abou…
There's also a fourth thing to take into consideration. The pandemic caused a lot of people in san francisco to start working from home, so a huge number of people who would normally be in higher profile areas, like in downtown, aren't there. BART, for example, has been running at a third the ridership it was pre-2020 (1). Thus, the few people left, especially the homeless, become all the more visible. When all you see are homeless people when walking down Market Street, it becomes easy to think that the problem is a lot more out of control than it is.
(1) https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/202204%20MRR.p...
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#4So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either: 1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019) 2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them 3) the newsmedia are just printing stories abou…
There's also a fourth thing to take into consideration. The pandemic caused a lot of people in san francisco to start working from home, so a huge number of people who would normally be in higher profile areas, like in downtown, aren't there. BART, for example, has been running at a third the ridership it was pre-2020 (1). Thus, the few people left, especially the homeless, become all the more visible. When all you s…
Excellent point, thanks. I could easily imagine that going into a downward spiral, where the lack of non-homeless leads to more discomfort, leads to even fewer non-homeless, until it becomes a no-go zone.
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#5So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either: 1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019) 2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them 3) the newsmedia are just printing stories abou…
The other possibility is that this report is straight from the SF dept. of homelessness, obviously they are biased and this is pretty much a PR move. It seems more like damage control, "hey guys, it's not that bad, see?".
Had the city remained cleaned, enforced loitering laws, and protected citizens from petty thefts and crime, perhaps it wouldn't be looking at a dark future after much of the tech force has gone remote.
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#6So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either: 1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019) 2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them 3) the newsmedia are just printing stories abou…
IMO it’s #3 plus the point the poster made below about the homeless-to-not ratio seeming higher due to people staying home. I really haven’t noticed a significant difference in homelessness since I’ve lived in SF (mid 2010s). Not that it isn’t really bad, I just haven’t seen it get worse.
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#7So, this runs rather counter to the news stories I have been reading about the SF homeless situation. That means, either: 1) the numbers are bogus (e.g. they are missing a higher percentage of homeless in their count than they did in 2019) 2) the remaining homeless are more problematic in their behavior, thus causing more of a problem even though there are fewer of them 3) the newsmedia are just printing stories abou…
I heard the Mayor and SFPD have cleared the homeless in the TL, so they've moved to other parts of the city.
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#8As i read it there was a large increse in shelter capacity. The amoubt of street homelessness dropped by about 20% because there was an increase of shelter space of about 20%. Its of course not a 1:1 ratio but pretty close,. Basically nothing has changed
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#9This report doesn't go into very much detail what "sheltered" means. Does a tent count? Does sleeping in an alcove in front of a store count?
Re: SF Homelessness – 2022 Point-in-Time Count: Preliminary Results
#10I would like to recommend a podcast called 'According to Need' [0] (by some of the 99% Invisible crew) which talks about homelessness in the Bay Area. I don't quite understand some of the local context, but there's only 5 episodes and I found it really interesting.