By Derek Falconer / OpEd – San Diego Union-Tribune / Jan. 18, 2024
[Please go to original for any links.]
When proponents of a proposal spend more time criticizing the motives of its detractors than defending the merits of the proposal itself, it often indicates the idea itself is a bad one. This is the case with the city’s proposed Barracks H homeless encampment. The proposed site will house up to 1,000 homeless and at-risk individuals right at the doorstep of San Diego International Airport and Harbor Island, near Liberty Station, and within a 20-minute walk of nine schools.
While the need to address the homeless crisis is undeniable, we must critically assess whether this waterfront location is the right choice for an unprecedentedly large encampment. (For comparison, the largest shelter in Los Angeles is 382 beds.) This site could easily become a waterfront version of San Francisco’s Tenderloin District, fraught with crime and drugs, and unsettlingly close to vital areas and schools.
In October, I launched a petition that has garnered over 6,600 signatures, urging the city to rethink the encampment location. Our critics, including the authors of a recent op-ed, swiftly labeled us “Not In My Backyard” types. To be very clear: We are deeply committed to helping solve our cherished city’s homelessness crisis and helping our neighbors in need. But the best public policies are innovative approaches to society’s most persistent challenges — homelessness being a prime example. Unfortunately, the current proposal represents an election-year attempt to hastily jam through the easiest, most uninspired solution to a hard problem. It will create more issues than it solves.
The proposed site is nestled in one of the most sought-after waterfront areas of our city. It lies across McCain Road from our airport, across Kinkaid Road from Liberty Station and across Harbor Island Drive from Spanish Landing children’s playground. While currently vacant, such a prime spot will become a magnet, attracting at-risk individuals from across the region. This will increase our city’s homeless population and lead to a permanent, entrenched community on our city’s waterfront.
The expense of this facility will also be staggering. While the city boasts a $20 million annual cost as a sign of fiscal responsibility, this overlooks the consequences of economic downturn on our waterfront: decreased tax revenue, job loss and deterred investments. There are billions of dollars of new development projects within a mile of the proposed encampment that will create thousands of jobs — Harbor Island East Redevelopment, Airport Terminal 1 construction, Liberty Station Youth Aquatic Center and two new hotels, to name a few. The true cost of this encampment is exponentially larger than the city is advertising and could cost many San Diegans their jobs.
The city’s assurance of safety and security for the surrounding neighborhoods, businesses and residents is also profoundly questionable. The proposed site is not a detention center; its inhabitants can freely come and go. This plan merely transfers the blight of East Village right to our waterfront and airport — the very face of our city to visiting tourists and businesses. According to the city’s own findings, this population is significantly more prone to addiction and crime. How can we accept this plan when it merely moves problems and solves very little?
Additionally, the safety of the site itself for its proposed inhabitants is dubious at best. The city has already been sued over asbestos contamination at this site, and the relentless noise from nearby airplane traffic only 700 yards away (where zoning laws prohibit residential housing — especially in tents) is a looming threat to public health. The city’s camping ban confronts the impoverished with a cruel choice: seek refuge in a hazardous, noise-ridden encampment or face punishment for trying to survive. We need a solution that ensures safety and dignity for both the community and those who need a safe place to call home.
Lastly, we must think of our children. Addressing homelessness is crucial, but we should be honest about the risks involved with situating nearly 1,000 homeless individuals within very close proximity of playgrounds and youth athletic fields, within a 20-minute walk of nine schools. These institutions include charter schools with open campuses and diverse student bodies from across San Diego educating thousands of youth. This is a dangerous location for a shelter of this magnitude.
We support the administration’s focus on the homelessness crisis, but we need a common sense policy that works for all San Diegans — its vulnerable groups, visitors, businesses and children. The Barracks H encampment does not. If you share our concerns, we encourage you to sign our petition.
Falconer is an engineering program manager, a Little League coach and youth robotics mentor. He is the father of three boys and lives in Point Loma. He is not related to former Mayor Kevin Faulconer.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
If a form of housing isn’t permitted by zoning due to the airport noise, then how does that work with hotels let alone a shelter? Add ear plugs with that hazmat suit?
Building a tent city, no matter how large the tents are, is a bad idea in this location. The most local residents need to raise royal hell over this to protect the children in the surrounding schools and the families and children in the surrounding homes.