"annexation of public land that belongs to the taxpayers"

It's worth considering why people are more sympathetic to:

A) Restaurant owners who, under San Francisco's 'Shared Spaces' scheme, have been given the right to construct outdoor dining spaces on public land (i) without any payment for use of the land, and (ii) with the right to exclude/eject members of the public from that land, unless they pay the restaurant.

Than:

B) People who would otherwise be homeless living on public land.