Last Sunday’s column about four homeless myths prompted a deluge of reaction — more than I’ve received for any other column. From “riveting” and “eye-opening” to “what a crock,” the reactions ran the gamut.

Readers also posed questions about other nuggets of conventional wisdom regarding the city’s most perplexing problem. Call this “MythBusters, Part 2.”

Myth 5: The Coalition on Homelessness is a bunch of money-grubbing leeches who want to keep the homeless population big so the dollars keep rolling in.

Jennifer Friedenbach, the director of the coalition, is probably the best known, most quoted person in the city’s homeless advocacy world. It’s understandable that some view her as contributing to the homeless problem — she fights against a lot of City Hall proposals.

But if she’s in the job for the riches, she’s failing miserably. She makes $16.20 an hour and works 30 hours a week for an annual salary of just over $25,000. The coalition pays nine employees; those without children make $15 an hour, and those with kids make $16.20 an hour.

The annual budget is $387,000 and comes entirely from private donations, mostly from people who read the Street Sheet newspaper.

But how is Friedenbach not homeless herself in this exorbitantly expensive city? She and her husband, a teacher, live with their two kids in a 960-square-foot house in the Mission they bought 19 years ago for $185,000.

Friedenbach has heard the myth that she’s living large and the coalition is “just a big scam.”

“We have a pretty strong philosophy at the organization around not profiting off of poverty,” she said. Profiting she’s certainly not.

Myth 6: The city spends $36,000 per year for each homeless person.

In January, The Chronicle reported the city spends $241 million annually on homeless services, a figure that comes from the mayor’s budget office.

Plenty of people divided that amount by 6,686 — the number of homeless people found in last year’s count — and figured the city is spending $36,000 per person. They also asked the logical question: Why not give them $3,000 per month for rent instead?

If only it were that simple.

As The Chronicle report pointed out, that total includes $112 million for supportive housing for formerly homeless people and $27.2 million for eviction prevention to keep people from becoming homeless.

Also, dividing by 6,686 doesn’t work too well, either. That’s the number of homeless people that were in San Francisco on one night in January 2015. But the total number of homeless people served throughout the fiscal year is higher.

In truth, there is no one dollar amount the city spends on a homeless person. Some who receive no services could conceivably cost nothing. The mayor’s budget office says it costs an average of $17,353 a year for each person in supportive housing and $87,480 for the sickest on the streets who need constant medical care.

Math. Always making things confusing.

Myth 7: If a homeless person wants services, he or she can get them immediately.

You’d hope this would be true in a city that spends $241 million — a whopping amount — on the problem. But it isn’t.

A homeless person can get a one-night emergency shelter bed quickly. But anything else — supportive housing, longer-term shelter beds, mental health care, substance abuse services — requires a waiting list. If the waiting list is even taking new names. Some are so long, they’re closed.

Teresa Friend, director and managing attorney for the Homeless Advocacy Project of the Bar Association of San Francisco, said all waiting lists for housing beyond shelter take years. Single-room-occupancy hotel rooms, which used to be the go-to, now cost as much as $1,500 a month.

The same goes for services. Last week, Friend tried to help a client addicted to meth get into drug treatment. He had to get a tuberculosis test, an identification card, a letter from a doctor and a letter from a veterinarian about his service animal just to get on the waiting list. She doesn’t know when he’ll get treatment.

“Right now, anybody who knew anything about anything would never come to San Francisco for services,” she said. “There aren’t any.”

Myth 8: We’re all just one paycheck away from being homeless.

The advocates have their own myths, and this is one of them. Many insist any of us could find ourselves living on the streets at any time.

The personal finance website Bankrate.com released a study in January showing 63 percent of Americans have no emergency savings and that an unexpected $1,000 medical bill or car repair tab would be a huge problem. But it also showed respondents would deal with the financial crisis by reducing other spending, borrowing from family or friends or using credit cards.

Last year’s count found 25 percent of the city’s homeless wound up on the streets because of a lost job and 13 percent because of an eviction. But alcohol, drug use, a falling-out with family or friends, and divorce added up to the rest. In a separate question, the population reported high levels of drug and alcohol abuse (37 percent), psychiatric conditions (35 percent) and disabilities (28 percent).

I can’t fathom what would have to happen in my life to put me on the streets, but it would take far more than one lost paycheck. A lot of family and friends would have to turn me away. And you’re probably the same.

Empathy and compassion are wonderful. Hyperbole? Not so much.

Myth 9: The mayor finally ordered a sweep of the huge Division Street encampment in February, so that’s that. Problem solved.

Scores of people from the encampment were moved into shelters, and the area under the freeway continues to be clearer.

But like a never-ending game of Whack-a-Mole, new encampments have sprung up nearby. Mary Ann Mills, a retired interior designer living near Seventh and Berry streets, said a three-person encampment there swelled to 20 after the Division Street sweeps. Residents in other areas around Division report the same thing.

Mills and her neighbors have emailed the mayor and her supervisor and have called 311 and the police. Still, trash is everywhere, bikes get stolen and homeless people sprawl on her complex’s grass.

“The Division Street sweep was a great thing for somebody,” she said. But certainly not her.

Supervisor Scott Wiener sent a letter to several city departments in January about the encampment problem. He finally got an answer last week. Apparently writing a letter about a camp takes about as long as clearing it.

The letter states the mayor agrees tent living is not humane and the administration is trying to move those campers into shelter rather than rely on police crackdowns. In 2015, the Police Department contacted 521 people in encampments, citing some but “admonishing” the majority to get services.

Another tidbit from the letter: There are about 700 homeless people living in 100 encampments around San Francisco. One camp down, 99 to go.

Heather Knight is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer who covers City Hall politics. Email: hknight@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @hknightsf