Myrna Melgar, Matt Bochetto, Dr. Ed Yee and Stephen Martin-Pinto — Supervisor Myrna Melgar and challengers Stephen Martin-Pinto, Dr. Edward Yee and Matt Boschetto respond to the Westside Observer.

City’s RV Response

A Westside Observer Special Election Feature

• • • • • • • • • • August 28, 2024 • • • • • • • • • •

How would you rate the City’s response to the RV resident encampment at Lake Merced? Please comment on the Supervisor’s response as well as the SFMTA’s actions. Please also share your concerns about the future for those residents.

Stephen Martin-Pinto Responds:

The response overall from the city has been poor. The RV problem has become an issue because SFMTA has refused to enforce parking laws, while enforcing them for everyone else. Furthermore, when I have personally walked by the RV encampments on Lake Merced Boulevard and Winston Drive, I have noticed running generators and accumulation of waste which are environmental and health issues. The eviction of the RVs from Winston Drive to the Pomeroy Center made it abundantly clear that city leadership has no intention of solving the problem, but rather hiding it.

What we are asking from the city is a solution to the RV problem, and this is nothing new that hasn't been done before. In 2019, there was a similar RV issue on De Wolf Street in District 11. A coordinated response between SF DPH, SFMTA, and SFPD resolved the problem. Shelter was offered, and those who refused were evicted.

I took the time to visit with the RV residents at the Pomeroy Center to try to find out more about the situation. What I discovered was surprising. In addition to Honduras and Nicaragua, many of the RV residents were from Brazil, and they were here without documentation.”

As a supervisor candidate and a concerned citizen, I took the time to visit with the RV residents at the Pomeroy Center to try to find out more about the situation. What I discovered was surprising. In addition to Honduras and Nicaragua, many of the RV residents were from Brazil, and they were here without documentation. I asked them what they were doing for work, and many of them said they were working for Uber Eats, Door Dash, and other positions in the gig economy. Upon further investigation, I found out that many of the residents were driving and delivering for these companies without driver’s licenses. They were able to do this because they rent profiles from legitimate Uber Eats, Door Dash, etc... drivers. This is, of course, illegal and poses several security and safety risks. I was recently interviewed by Daily Mail UK, and this potentially points to a much more serious and bigger problems with potential links to human trafficking and organized crime activity that as supervisor, I will fully investigate. Furthermore, many of these RVs are being purchased on Facebook Marketplace according to residents I spoke with. I will also, as supervisor, investigate and take further action on this issue.

Ultimately, a considerable section of the RV community has chosen RV living because we have allowed it to be a choice through non-enforcement and poor strategy. We cannot have a system in which we have one set of laws that apply unequally to different classes of people. As supervisor I will ensure that the law is applied fairly and equally every time.

Matt Boschetto Responds:

On the night of August 1st, the Coalition on Homelessness coordinated a mass move of all the RVs located on Winston Drive, cutting a lock and chain to occupy the zoo parking lot. This move came in reaction to the SFMTA’s plan to repave the road, after which hourly-limited parking would be implemented, effectively eliminating Winston Drive as a parking haven for the RVs. Park rangers and the SFPD responded, treating the incident as a felony breaking-and-entering.

While the zoo occupation has barely been mentioned in the news, this extraordinary event is clearly a coordinated effort by the Coalition on Homelessness, who willfully broke the law in an attempt to take over City land without the consent of the government with little regard for West Side residents. The fact that an investigator from the City Attorney’s Office is involved highlights the seriousness of this overreach.

In an email to a concerned user of the Pomeroy Center, Supervisor Myrna Melgar stated she was aware of the plan: “On July 29th, my office was informed of the RV dwellers on Winston Ave relocating to Zoo Road with the help of staff from the Coalition on Homelessness.” Did Melgar know they would commit a felony break-in at the Zoo? Would she admit it if she did? Either way, she quickly skirted responsibility, claiming she “reached out to the SFPD, MTA, and the Mayor’s Office to request support and a coordinated response to address the situation.” Great, but what about her knowledge that they would move to Zoo Road?

If she knew they were moving to Zoo Road on July 29th, why didn’t she inform the Pomeroy Center? Why didn’t she push back on the Coalition for planning to move the vehicles to a place that West Side residents and Pomeroy stakeholders have repeatedly said is not suitable for RV parking? The fact that she has “been working diligently for the past three years to identify a safe parking site with services for this population&rduo; is a testament to her failure to address the issue over almost four years in office. Is this political theater to show false progress on an issue she has had little resolve to fix?

Eyewitnesses claimed Melgar’s staff was on site during the occupation, but it is unclear whether they were there during the break-in or after Rec and Park responded. What is clear is that Melgar directed the coordinated move to Zoo Road, next to the Pomeroy Center, contrary to the center’s past objections. According to David Dubinsky, Pomeroy’s CEO, “RVs and cars have made it dangerous for our participants and staff to walk to the Center.” While most West Side residents want to see this issue resolved and “share compassion for the RV residents, Zoo Road is not an acceptable location.”

Placing RVs next to an institution serving disabled children is not the best solution. When you consider there are children among the RV dwellers, we are mixing two vulnerable populations who deserve our utmost care and consideration. Failing to notify residents and stakeholders adequately goes against common sense and suggests Melgar prioritizes the housing-first ideology over practical solutions to the issues her constituents want addressed.

While the prevailing myth from Melgar’s office is that most of the RV dwellers are working-class families with children, eyewitness accounts suggest otherwise. Does Melgar have the exact count of families vs. individuals, and how many children are living in the enclave? If not, who does? Shouldn’t any honest attempt to provide solutions include concrete counts? This should be the first step in determining a fair and compassionate solution for the people living in those conditions.

Even if all the RV dwellers were families with kids, why does she believe it is acceptable to raise children on the side of a road? With a $14 billion budget and over $1 billion spent on homelessness and health services, it’s inexcusable that the city has not prioritized getting these families into a safe place to raise their children. Supervisor Melgar can do better for both the West Side and our homeless children.

The city has repeatedly offered services and housing solutions to this cohort, with 23 families moved into permanent housing. While Supervisor Melgar will be quick to take credit for this, it’s clear the mayor’s office and relevant city departments have played key roles. A spokesman from HSH claimed, “These households have been offered an abundance of resources, and many have exited homelessness through our programs.” At what point do we consider them voluntarily homeless? What do we say to parents of homeless children who repeatedly turn down safer housing options to remain living in an RV on the street?

Melgar’s plan is to let them live in unsafe conditions on Zoo Road until permanent housing can be found. According to a memo obtained by The Standard, Melgar’s plan “outlines a proposal to make the one-way, L-shaped street into a two-way cul-de-sac, with the southern end closed to through traffic.” It remains unclear how long this process will take and whether new families can replace those who accept services. Does Melgar have a timeline for this plan? When does she expect that all the dwellers will be housed, and Zoo Road given back to the public?

True leadership on this issue admits it’s unsustainable for the city to keep allowing people to live like this. Melgar speaks about a permanent place for the RVs, but is this a permanent solution for San Francisco? What stops people from continuing to move in, like the 21-year-old plumber and his girlfriend who moved into an RV to “save for their future?” What Melgar does not talk about is enforcement.

Now that Grants Pass has been overturned, San Francisco can end RV street dwelling. Any full promise should include a temporary place for the families and the rest of the dwellers to live safely, but also a full enforcement plan for RV street dwelling. We need to increase our capacity for services for those who deserve our compassion. Those who become homeless in SF should not wait a day for services, especially when kids are involved. At the same time, we need leaders who will look after the good of those adhering to the social contract and strike a balance between compassion and accountability. Unfortunately, for District 7 and the West Side, Melgar has proven not to be that type of leader.

Supervisor Myrna Melgar:

It has always been my top priority to get families into stable housing – no child should ever have to live out of a vehicle on our City’s streets. I am grateful for HSH’s quick action that led to the successful placement of these families and the MTA for quickly addressing the access problems created by this situation for the Pomeroy Center. These agencies along with my office and the leadership of Mayor Breed brought together the management of Parkmerced Apartments, supportive services of La Raza Family Resources Center, Compass Family Services, Episcopal Community Services, and the Welcome Home Project to get these families into housing units. It just shows that with effective coordination and with swift outside-the-box thinking, we can make progress.

I am grateful for HSH’s quick action that led to the successful placement of these families and the MTA for quickly addressing the access problems created by this situation for the Pomeroy Center.”

I have included the most up to date information about this issue from the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Services below.

HSH has been outreaching to the households living in RVs and encamped on Winston and more recently on Zoo Road. HSH has consistently made offers of shelter, housing, public benefits and health services to these households.

Over the past several months, HSH helped 23 households move off of Winston and into long term housing. These clients were able to access a variety of housing resources ranging from rapid rehousing to project-based PSH and scattered site PSH. Other households declined offers of housing assistance.

When the encampment moved to Zoo Road, we continued to outreach to the community. Many of these households had been previously offered housing assistance from HSH and had declined these offers. Given the pending enforcement and households on Zoo Road have been more inclined to accept our offers. For households eligible for rental subsidies, we offered an expedited move in process into pre-identified housing units. These two factors have led to an increase in acceptance of housing assistance by the households on Zoo Rd.

As of Sunday August 18th, 27 households with 69 unique family members were assessed and referred to permanent housing programs: 25 rapid rehousing and 2 permanent supportive housing.

14 of these households have moved into their new homes with 9 more moving in on Monday the 19th. The two households referred to permanent supportive housing are waiting on placements and 2 households declined HSH’s offer of housing assistance.

Big thank you the HSH staff, the Homeless Outreach Team, Compass Family Services, Episcopal Community Services, and Park Merced who are working together to smoothly transition these households from their RVs to new homes, just in time for the new school year. This work includes outreach, eligibility assessment, subsidy administration, unit viewing, leases signings, moving in support, furniture purchases, utility activation, landlord engagement, and ongoing social services.

For households receiving Rapid Rehousing subsidies, the household pays approximately 30% of their income towards the rent and the subsidy makes up the difference. Households will receive rental assistance for 2 years with the opportunity to extend based on their unique circumstances.

Emily Cohen, Deputy Director for Communications & Legislative Affairs, San Francisco Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing

Dr. Edward Yee Responds:

Dr. Yee did not respond to the question.

This is a special election feature to inform readers in District 7 about the candidates positions. Got a question? Send it to the editor, editorATwestsideobserver.com

August 28, 2024

Laguna Honda’s Struggles?

A Westside Observer Special Election Feature

• • • • • • • • • • July 19, 2024 • • • • • • • • • •

Since the budget-related closure of the Mental Health Rehabilitation Facility at SFGH (MHRF) ten years ago, the Health Department began relocating mentally troubled patients, including those with drug addiction behaviors, to Laguna Honda Hospital, mixing them with frail senior and disabled populations. Problems of cohorting patients began immediately, culminating in the loss of certification.

What would you recommend to the Health Department to permanently fix the problem, or do you think the steps that have been initiated to regain certification are sufficient?

Stephen Martin-Pinto Responds:

The failure of the Department of Public Health to understand the second and third order effects of not properly sorting and quarantining patients with mental illness and drug addiction from the senior and disabled populations was profound. It was clear that the proper risk assessment of mixing patient populations was never completed. This was a failure of leadership and I have concerns in the competency within the Department of Public Health. I would do a deep dive investigation into who made the decision to move these incompatible patient populations next to each other, and how it was approved and justified.

Patients with drug addiction and mental illness issues may need to be isolated from the general population, and there should be physical barriers (such as locked doors and security) and administrative barriers (such as signage and written policies limiting visiting hours) between the various populations. A system of continuous assessments needs to be created, evaluating residents for improvements in mental condition or sobriety. As patients improve, they may need to be moved to different parts of the Laguna Honda Hospital facility, and a plan should be made for this as well.

It was clear that the proper risk assessment of mixing patient populations was never completed. This was a failure of leadership and I have concerns in the competency within the Department of Public Health. It was clear that the proper risk assessment of mixing patient populations was never completed. This was a failure of leadership and I have concerns in the competency within the Department of Public Health.”

Essentially this was a failure of supervision and planning. I would hold those who made and approved the decision to mix incompatible patient populations together accountable, and if necessary, search for competent qualified leadership to manage the Department of Public Health and Laguna Honda Hospital facility.

Matt Boschetto Responds:

Since the closure of the facility at SFGH ten years ago, relocating mentally troubled patients, including those with drug addiction behaviors, to Laguna Honda Hospital has caused significant issues. These problems culminated in the loss of certification due to the mixing of frail senior and disabled populations with patients requiring different care levels. While our elected leaders have been part of the recent recertification process, it’s crucial to recognize that their failure to address the underlying issues contributed to the crisis.

The failure of Proposition C and the overemphasis on permanent housing contributed to these issues by neglecting the need for comprehensive treatment services. Addressing these failures and implementing these solutions will ensure that Laguna Honda and similar institutions remain certified and provide the highest quality of care.”

To achieve permanent stability and prevent future lapses in certification, the Health Department must address the root causes of patient cohorting issues. This includes establishing specialized facilities for mentally troubled patients and those with addiction behaviors to ensure appropriate care without compromising the safety and well-being of frail seniors and disabled individuals. Reinstituting stringent screening and admission policies is essential to prevent mixing incompatible patient populations, reducing violence and drug use within facilities. Increased funding for mental health services is crucial to provide adequate support for all patients, reducing the need to relocate them to inappropriate settings.

Supervisor Myrna Melgar:

Laguna Honda Hospital is a City treasure and we must ensure its sustainability. The recent decertification crisis has been averted for now, thanks to the hard work of staff, and the City’s leadership who all came together to address all the findings that led to the decertification in the first place.

Now that California voters have made funding available to build facilities for this population in proposition 1, I think we need to plan to build a facility for this specific use.”

The initial incident that resulted in the hospital being scrutinized was due to drugs being found on a patient, but many of the subsequent findings in the survey that led to the decertification were not. Many of the findings had to do with protocols, some even had to do with the physical facility. The population of folks who have substance use disorder and/or mental illness is here in our city and many of these folks are aging, and homeless. Now that California voters have made funding available to build facilities for this population in proposition 1, I think we need to plan to build a facility for this specific use.

Dr. Edward Yee Responds:

Dr. Yee did not respond to the question.

This is a special election feature to inform readers in District 7 about the candidates positions. Got a question? Send it to the editor, editorATwestsideobserver.com

July 19, 2024

Myrna Melgar and Stephen Martin-Pinto — Supervisor Myrna Melgar and challengers Stephen Martin-Pinto, Dr. Edward Yee and Matt Boschetto respond to the Westside Observer. Editors Note: We initially left out candidate Boschetto; we regret the error.

Do You Support the Mayor’s Upzoning Plan?

A Westside Observer Special Election Feature

• • • • • • • • • • June 25, 2024 • • • • • • • • • •

Mayor Breed has proposed an unprecedented rollback of San Francisco’s height and density limitations that would allow six-eight story buildings in areas previously zoned for one and two-story construction. All three candidates for Supervisor in District 7 have responded.

Upzoning Plan — The zoning map from the Planning Commission of Proposed Upzoning as of February 2024

Supervisor Melgar Responds

I support upzoning commercial and transportation corridors consistent with the SF Housing Element, which was passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors last year.

District 7 must build all kinds of housing to help San Francisco meet its targets, but it must also do it to meet the needs of our own people today and tomorrow. We have a diverse population - we need housing for middle-class folks, and we need low-income housing. We need larger units for families, and we also have an aging population so we need smaller units for seniors. We need housing for students — District 7 is home to SFSU, City College and UCSF Parnassus. This past year we made it much easier for homeowners to add in-law units, up to 3 more units to their single family homes.

The draft plan that the Planning Department has shared with the public still needs work, and as Chair of the Land Use and Transportation Committee of the Board of Supervisors, I will work to ensure this plan responds to the needs of our district, and meets our commitments by the 2026 deadline.”

As a City, we have also committed to climate action goals, so we are planning to build the most housing where it is close to public transportation so that future generations can be less car dependent. We have several large sites that are already entitled for denser housing, like the Balboa Reservoir, which will be 50% affordable and Stonestown.

Westside Upzoning Plan — 6-8 story buildings would be OK if the plan is executed as is.

Stephen Martin-Pinto Responds:

The plan needs further refinement.

It does not consider limitations of street size, infrastructure, and geologic conditions in many locations. For example, according to the planning department webpage, it shows the 19th Avenue corridor slated for high-rise upzoning between Sloat and Junipero Serra Boulevards, even though the properties indicated are on Stonecrest and Denslowe Drives, two very narrow residential streets inappropriate for high-rise development.

It would be more appropriate to shift this development onto Stonestown, Parkmerced, or San Francisco State University property. The greenbelts on Junipero Serra Boulevard and Brotherhood Way should remain – we have few greenbelts and park neighborhoods in San Francisco, and these should be protected.

I agree that we can add stories to buildings along West Portal and Ocean Avenues, however I do think that the 85 foot height-limit is too aggressive for those streets and likely to cause unnecessary and avoidable blowback. I think that 2-6 story limits are an acceptable building height limit in most locations on those corridors, and even modest height increases can yield substantial housing stock in a minimally contentious way.

I believe that, with some policy adjustments, we can stabilize and even reduce housing costs in San Francisco. The permitting process for new construction should be audited, and permits that are unclear, unnecessary, and contradictory should be deconflicted and eliminated.”

Ultimately, it's about striking a balance of protecting and preserving our neighborhoods and communities while providing for more housing in the least contentious and most sensible manner, and the mayor's proposed zoning change plan does not meet this objective. To me it’s evident that the mayor’s plan was drafted by someone who is not quite familiar with the neighborhoods of San Francisco.

Furthermore, I object to the term "well-resourced" and its role in shaping zoning changes. Zoning changes should not be based on politics, but rather common sense and practicality. Furthermore, the methodology for determining what differentiates a well-resourced area from a non-well-resourced area is based on subjective, complex, and unclear methodology, and even by its own standards, seems to have been applied inconsistently across San Francisco.

Rent control policies should be modified to entice more landlords to enter the market and increase housing supply. Affordable housing requirements should be replaced with a voucher system that allows for more freedom of choice and flexibility in living locations and situations.

These policy adjustments would add to the supply of available housing in the most expedient, least disruptive way, but are not a part of the mayor's comprehensive housing plan.
Links: Planning Department webpage: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/6e0e399f9c82456dbda233eacebc433d/
Well-Resourced methodology: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity/2024/draft-2024-opportunity-mapping-methodology.pdf
Inconsistent application of well-resourced neighborhoods: https://generalplan.sfplanning.org/images/I1.housing/Well-resourced_Neighborhoods.pdf

Dr. Edward Yee Responds:

Simply put... doesn’t make financial sense.

Infrastructure needs to be integrated into this zoning plan.

It must be sequentially implemented as one change will cause perturbation and possible unforeseen ripples.

Matt Boschetto Responds:

I believe the upzoning plan has been politically disastrous in District 7. While most West Side residents want to build more housing, they also care deeply about quality of life, neighborhood character, and community voice. For District 7 voters, these priorities are not mutually exclusive and must be balanced thoughtfully. Any plan that overlooks this fact either misunderstands or disregards what many constituents want.

I understand the logic behind upzoning to satisfy the state's housing mandate. However, the extent of the upzoning has caused significant opposition, hampering progress on housing issues in our district. I firmly believe District 7 can meet its housing goals without compromising our neighborhoods. By focusing on the least contentious and highest probability parcels, we can build more units while preserving community harmony.

There are excellent examples of this approach in District 7, with nearly ten thousand units, many of them affordable, in the pipeline at the Balboa Reservoir, Park Merced, and Stonestown developments. This volume demonstrates that our district can produce housing effectively while uniting the community rather than dividing it.

As District 7 Supervisor, I promise to stand up for residents while prioritizing sensible housing development across the city. My focus will be on market dynamics and finding solutions that incentivize developers to break ground. If we are to prioritize housing, we must stop overburdening landlords and developers with excessive subsidies and regulations. From cumbersome planning processes to overly stringent rent control policies and affordable housing requirements, the current environment has made real estate investment too risky and stagnant.

Further movement in this direction by leaders more familiar with City Hall politics than market dynamics will only hinder our progress toward a more affordable and abundant housing market. I am committed to bridging this gap and ensuring that District 7 can grow responsibly, maintaining the unique character and quality of life that our residents cherish."

This is a special election feature to inform readers in District 7 about the candidates positions. Got a question? Send it to the editor.

June 25, 2024