So, I live in SF, work in these libraries, and my gf lives in that immediate area, and I can be found at that library pretty frequently typing away on sublime text.

As is typical with SF stories about homelessness. This article either seems misinformed about the facts on the ground, or can't seem to wrap its head around the fact that SF goes above and beyond to support the folks living on the streets here.

---

Issue 1: Redundancy. The article seems to completely ignore the SFWiFi program that exists along Market St, and in nearly all public parks: https://sfgov.org/sfc/sites/default/files/San%20Francisco%20...

Here, using the Eureka Valley (Castro) library wifi is fairly redundant, as the library is 250 feet from Market street. Most of the folks I see on the street in the immediate area (north side of 16th) should be able to access #SFWiFi where they are.

---

Issue 2: Location. The area directly adjacent to the library in question is very tight, and very, very residential. Pond St and Prosper St which flank the library can best be described as residential allies. They are tiny, quite streets, with narrow sidewalks. It would be pretty unreasonable that folks staying up using the wifi on these streets wouldn't be a non-negligible disturbance to the residents there. https://goo.gl/maps/UYsq79P5WXfhCJ8m8

The area where I do see people regularly congregate at night are on the north side of the street directly west of Dinosaur Sandwiches. I know this because I live by the panhandle, and this my preferred walk back on nights I'm out to late in the mission. The encampments in this location can range from small to making-the-sidewalk-impassible, but generally speaking, I could see how the noise could be an issue for the people on Pond St.

---

Issue 3: Crime. This quote from the story piqued my interest:

>Legislative aide Jackie Thornhill told The Verge in an email that “obviously the presence or lack of all night wifi isn’t going to make a huge difference on its own,” but she believes it’s one of many reasons the library is so attractive to criminal activity. Thornhill also sent a spreadsheet of 911 calls that she says shows crime has been down for the last nine months.

I have personally witnessed multiple actual drug deals go down inside this library. I brought it up with the staff there, and they basically shrugged with a "it sucks, but what are you going to do?" It's the only library that I've witnessed actually crimes happening while I worked. Which is saying something, as I am a bit of a SF library fan, as I work for myself doing computery things. Even the civic center library, with all it's eccentricity seems to not be dealing with the issues that the eureka valley library is. (Aside: the best library in town is the UCSF Parnassus library, however it has been closed to the public since the start of covid)

---

In all, this article seems to be a classic case of well meaning, but probably mostly uninformed blog-as-journalism writers putting together a story weighted to find outrage where it may or may not actually exist.

Do I think turning the WiFi off is a good thing? Probably not. Do I understand why local residents are calling for it? Sure. If I actually knew if late night noise, (with a generous) etc, have become a problem, I'd probably support them.

Do I think turning the WiFi off is some sort of huge problem for folks living on the street? No. There is easy access to public WiFi within a block of there. So much so that I've turned off auto-join #SFWiFi from my phone because it can have a weak signal an interrupt my browsing-on-foot all over the city.