A Flawed Path to Housing in San Francisco—Who’s Really Listening?

By Mike Nohr

I recently attended the Homelessness Oversight Commission’s community meeting at Glide Memorial. The invitation basically said, “Your voice matters.” For once, city officials said they weren’t there to present or answer questions—only to listen. That stood out. I’ve attended hundreds of public meetings, and it’s rare to see this level of humility.

The audience was predominately people who’ve lived the experience—currently or formerly unhoused individuals, and nonprofit staff. The stories shared were raw and painful. One woman first experienced homelessness at age 8. Another spoke while her young child, born during her time on the streets, sat nearby.

Unfortunately, not one local small business owner or local residents impacted directly by the situations voice was heard. Maybe some of them heard about the meeting or maybe they just gave up.

I have had a taste of that struggle. When I first moved to California, I lived in my car—a 1979 Camaro. It was cold, uncomfortable, and deeply humbling. That experience gave me compassion and a drive to speak up for more humane solutions for those who have fallen through our ever-fraying social net.

At the meeting, I raised concerns about the city’s proposed project at 1234 Great Highway—a $200 million beachfront subsidized housing complex for a mix of elderly residents and formerly unhoused seniors. The far underestimated cost will approach nearly $2 million per unit when you factor in construction, financing, long-term maintenance and staffing. And yet, with all of its expense the facility won’t offer onsite mental health or addiction treatment. Vulnerable grandmas and grandpas will be mixed with individuals still struggling from years of trauma on the street, with little support. That’s not equity—it’s a setup for failure. And yet, many city officials can’t wait for their photo op at the ribbon cutting.

100 very fortunate previously unhoused people will live at the beach all while thousands living in or near the Tenderloin will continue to live in squalor. How does this equate with the city’s equity, diversity and inclusion policies?

I’ve toured similar buildings to the proposed 1234 GHW project. At the Willie B. Kennedy Apartments, a TNDC (Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation) run site with a comparable model, but significantly different mix, I was told there are no social workers or managers working on evenings or weekends. The main staff person oversees several buildings. The elderly residents are left primarily in the care of a front desk receptionist. If something goes wrong the receptionist told me she was instructed to call 911.

I ask the director of TNDC “Do you vet the people or do they come directly off of the streets?” “Do they transition from the street to a shelter to an SRO to ensure they can get along with others?” “Are they required to get drug or mental health treatment if that is advised?” The answer was “That would be illegal based on the state’s “Housing First” mandate and for our funding requirements.

Despite attending more than a dozen community meetings, I’ve never heard the city or nonprofit members mention this kind of population mixing in their presentations. The project is being framed as senior housing, but the reality is much more complicated—and potentially dangerous.

I’ve also seen how past housing efforts have crumbled. In the Western Addition, subsidized units built just 30 years ago are already falling apart. One man I spoke with lives with mold from an unvented dryer and a leaking bathtub that damaged his walls. Based on this, why should we trust the city to maintain 1234 Great Highway or similar project any better?

Meanwhile, we’re spending massive sums on buildings and regularly voting on propositions to raise hundreds of millions for affordable housing, but not nearly enough on people. What if we used those financial resources to hire more social workers, mental health professionals, and addiction counselors instead of adding to our patchwork of underfunded housing sites?

If 80% of the calls that our police officers are called out on are for mental health crisis, homelessness, or addiction issues then why are we focusing so much on hiring police officers when it makes more sense that we should be hiring the professionals trained specifically to deal with those issues.

It’s not just about funding. It’s about accountability. Right now, hundreds of homeless nonprofits operate with public dollars but without unified oversight. The city is rapidly approaching a $1B investment for replicative staff (executives, marketing, grant writers…. ) for each nonprofit.

Many of the nonprofits fail at basics as simple as advertising public meetings or housing lotteries in ways that actually reach most local residents. If the goal is transparency and fairness, why are we relying on random Facebook hashtags and buried web pages for outreach and to get community input?

Lets face it… the system is broken from the start when homeless executives need homelessness to continue in order to retain their employment.

We need to rethink how this system works. Hire the best people from these nonprofits and build a city-run support system with measurable goals and consequences for failure. Stop building high-risk, high-cost facilities without proper wraparound services. And most of all—truly listen to the people these programs are meant to serve and implement their concerns and suggestions into the city’s plan.

I said to one of the commissioners. “Do you know that just blocks from here a hotel has removed dozens of body bags?” “Has the city not learned by now that warehousing humans is not the solution -you also need supportive services?”

The commissioner told me, “You have a lot of great ideas.” But I walked away knowing it was unlikely that he would do anything with them. “Your voice Matters” the flyer declared. But really, does it?

Ending on a positive note: Mayor Lurie is promoting a “Recover First” agenda to help the city’s behavioral health crisis. It is his attempt to break the cycle and the grip that the “Harm Reduction” agenda had over the city. Lets face it, if people aren’t held to some accountability how can we expect a good outcome? I wish Mayor Lurie and those most impacted by this crisis all the best in this endeavor.

So, I’m sharing this publicly now—not because I want acknowledgement, but because I want change

As a side note.

TNDC and Self Help for the Elderly (SHFTE) are supposed to promote community outreach meetings to get community input. Days before a community outreach meeting specifically for (1234GHW) I looked on both of their web sites and nothing was listed about the January meeting. I told both of them if they want more community input that they needed to actually post about the event on Nextdoor or the neighborhood Facebook pages. The day before the event they finally posted on their web sites and SHFTE on their corporate Face book page.

In addition to SHFTE's Face book page they also re-posted on 3 random Face book pages that almost NO ONE from the San Francisco area would even look at. The Face book posts all started with #Sunset (which showed almost no “likes” which means no one visits that page), #AffordableHousing (which is actually mostly about ADUs that are for sale) and #Housingforseniors (which is an international site with options in South Africa and other foreign locations). It had nothing to do with affordable housing for seniors specifically in San Francisco or the Sunset district.

These community funded nonprofits aren't advertising to the local people in an engaging manner. It is like they already know who (or which population) they want to give the housing to. This way, they say they have a lottery, but very few people are being made aware of the lottery. Personally, it feels like a scam put on by some of these city-funded non-profits that are supposed to care about the community.

Solution: Instead of funding hundreds of nonprofits with lots of replicative staff (Executives, marketing, grant writers…) why doesn’t the city hire the best talent from each of the nonprofits whereby the city will actually have control over the work that is being done. They will be able to set goals and objectives and fire those not meeting expectations and better manage how the homeless services are being implemented. Currently, the CEOs of the homeless nonprofits who are making significant six figure salaries aren’t fundamentally motivated to actually fix the homeless crisis. If they did, they wouldn’t have a job.