San Francisco opened a safe parking site at Candlestick Point in January 2022, saying it would hold up to 155 recreational vehicles and provide residents there with badly needed services.
Since then, though, the Bayview Vehicle Triage Center has fallen far short of those projections. Lack of electricity has hobbled the site, necessitating the use of polluting diesel generators and limiting the vehicles it can serve to 35.
At that level, the annual cost per vehicle spot is roughly $140,000 — “by far the most expensive homeless response intervention” in San Francisco, according to a budget analysis prepared for the Board of Supervisors.
Still, the supervisors’ Homelessness and Behavioral Health Select Committee on Friday unanimously recommended the city extend the shelter’s lease for another two years, at a cost of $312,000 a year — not including millions in operating costs.
The move means San Francisco will shell out at least another $12.2 million to fund the site and its operations, assuming the full board approves the committee’s recommendation.
“This is an expensive endeavor, but it will be more expensive — and we cannot afford the alternative — of leaving the unhoused and housed, quite frankly, to fend for themselves,” Supervisor Shamann Walton said. He voted yes along with committee members Hillary Ronen and Rafael Mandelman.
The saga of the program and the tensions it has ignited highlight the city’s ongoing struggle to house its poorest residents. Last year San Francisco estimated that 4,400 people were homeless and unsheltered, with about a quarter of them sleeping in RVs or other vehicles.
In July, city officials counted 1,058 inhabited vehicles across San Francisco — nearly half located in District 10, which includes Bayview-Hunters Point and Candlestick Point. Many vehicle owners had parked along Hunters Point Expressway near the site of Candlestick Park, which once housed the Giants and 49ers, leading to concerns from residents.
“We had an extremely untenable situation in the Candlestick area,” said Walton, who represents District 10. “Dozens of vehicles occupied by individuals and families as well. No restroom facilities, no showers, no coordinated services, blockage of roadways. Trash and waste also added to the issue.”
The city opened the Vehicle Triage Center, or VTC, in January 2022 at the boat launch parking lot of the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area, following a pilot project at another site on San Jose Avenue, which had spots for 29 vehicles. For the pilot project, the city spent $1,793,003 — or $61,828 per spot.
“There’s a lot that goes into making it a safe, dignified location,” said Emily Cohen, deputy director of the city’s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing.
That included buying or renting shower and bathroom trailers and hand-washing stations, and providing potable water and plumbing. “Those costs are expensive,” Cohen said.
The Bayview VTC ran into immediate problems. While it was supposed to hold up to 155 vehicles, the city lacked adequate electricity. The city contracted with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to power the site, but nearly two years later, officials said it still doesn’t have power needed to run at capacity.
Both Walton and Supervisor Hillary Ronen blasted PG&E for its service at the site, criticizing the company as “evil” and “a big part of the problem.”
In a lengthy statement, a PG&E spokesperson pushed back, saying that the project was “not delayed in any way.”
The spokesperson said that initially, in July 2021, San Francisco applied for a temporary service connection at 500 Hunters Point Expressway for a COVID-19 testing facility. The project was delayed because the city didn’t get equipment delivered on time. Permits were issued to complete the work in January 2023, but a month later the city pulled its application for the project.
Months later, PG&E said, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission applied for a new service connection at the same address for a different use — a site serving people living in vehicles.
“The SFPUC’s application was missing key information and was not deemed complete until Aug. 15, 2023,” the PG&E spokesperson wrote. “PG&E is now estimating the cost of the requested interconnection for the SFPUC. Federal regulations governing interconnections between utilities allow 45 business days to complete estimates. PG&E is on track to provide its estimate within the regulatory timeline.”
Lacking power, the city turned to the diesel generators, sparking a federal lawsuit from residents who said they violate the Clean Air Act. The city subsequently began replacing the generators with solar-powered pole lights, but the site still does not have adequate electricity.
The city has spent at least $8.6 million on the program, according to estimates from the city homelessness department, and because of the lack of power has to deliver fresh meals to the site daily, which Cohen said “is very expensive.”
The center has served 115 people since it opened, she said. According to a July city presentation, her agency has made 13 placements from vehicles at the site into permanent housing, with two more expected. It wasn’t clear how many people were housed in these placements.
Cohen defended the expenses, and residents of the shelter who attended Friday’s committee hearing said it provided security and services they wouldn’t find elsewhere.
“If I hadn’t found this place and been able to stay there, I would probably have 15 to 20 tickets for failing to move on time for the street cleaners,” said Charles Wesley Keener, a 63-year-old resident of the site.
Another resident, Mark Noti, said that but for the VTC, he would probably be living on the streets.
“It makes me feel safe that I have someplace to go, that my vehicle isn’t going to be towed — because it doesn’t run and they have people coming through there that are helping me to get it running,” he said.
“There’s good parts and bad parts in this thing,” he said. “I see more good in it than bad. So for me, it helps me because I’m safe here. And to move my vehicle — I couldn’t do it. They would tow it. And then what do I have? I don’t have anything.”
Some neighbors, though, have lost patience with the venture. Several called into the committee hearing, saying the center had failed to meet its basic objectives and was “fiscally irresponsible,” and criticizing the low number of referrals to permanent housing.
“At less than one placement per month, it would be more cost-effective to provide each VTC client with a monthly rental stipend,” wrote Marsha Maloof of the Bayview Hill Neighborhood Association in a letter to supervisors opposing continued operation of the site. “It is inconceivable that the City would continue to extend such a program with metrics of success at this level.”
Another caller noted that the average length of time residents stayed at the center was more than 200 days.
“It’s not triage,” he said. “This is basically warehousing folks, keeping them there for the long term.”
Reach St. John Barned-Smith: stjohn.smith@sfchronicle.com
