It seems to be a misleading statistic. I think it would probably include someone who moved to SF while homeless, found a home for a few weeks or months, and bec

It seems to be a misleading statistic. I think it would probably include someone who moved to SF while homeless, found a home for a few weeks or months, and became homeless again. Additionally, CA is a big state, and a lot those who came to it from elsewhere in CA might have been attracted to SF by its programs, economy, weather, parks, etc. So the view that the vast majority of homeless people living in places where housing is unaffordable are there (instead of a place where housing is cheaper) in order to maintain their social connections is an inaccurate one.