In reaction to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent veto of AB 255, which would have allowed cities to allocate some state homelessness funds for drug-free supportive housing, San Francisco lawmakers are introducing a bill that would bar use of city funds for new supportive housing projects that allow drug use, instead funding “drug-free and recovery-focused options.”
The bill, authored by District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey and Board of Supervisors’ President Rafael Mandelman, would also require a formal survey of all supportive housing residents in the city to determine their personal preferences for one of three supportive housing options: drug-tolerant (based on the current harm-reduction, “Housing First” standard); drug-free (where residents could be evicted for using drugs); or recovery-oriented (projects directly supporting recovering people with substance use disorders). Future policy for supportive housing would be based on survey results. Supervisors Stephen Sherrill and Danny Sauter, representing Districts 2 and 3, are cosponsors.
“This legislation will finally empower the residents of Permanent Supportive Housing to decide for themselves whether they want to live in drug-tolerant, drug-free, or recovery-oriented therapeutic support communities — and it will mandate that city dollars be prioritized to meet their demand for drug-free options moving forward,” said Dorsey in a press release, acknowledging his own background as a recovering addict.
Right now, San Francisco’s exclusively drug-tolerant PSH model is rightly blamed for wildly disproportionate rates of fatal overdoses, chaotic and too often violent neighborhood conditions, and a wide range of drug-driven public safety challenges. — Supervisor Matt Dorsey
Both San Francisco and California’s policy toward supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness and substance addiction is referred to as “Housing First,” which supports “nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use” and where project services are “informed by a harm-reduction philosophy” that treats addiction as part of residents’ lives. Housing First opponents maintain that this non-abstinence rule is a barrier to recovery and that homeless addicts seeking recovery need supportive housing spaces which are free of temptations to relapse.
This marks the second consecutive year that Newsom has vetoed a bill to fund sober housing. The governor cited costs, arguing that policy under AB 255 would not be fully supported by fees collected from recovery programs. San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie decried the veto, arguing that it “threatens to stop that progress in its tracks” by undermining the city’s initiatives. Meanwhile, Haney and Dorsey have demanded more explicit guidance from the governor on how state money can be allocated for recovery-based projects.
“It’s time to listen to our recovery community. Overwhelmingly, they share my conviction that no one exiting homelessness should need to choose between their recovery and a home that continually endangers it,” said coauthor Mandelman in a statement. This legislation will add desperately needed new choices that every unhoused San Franciscan deserves: drug-free or recovery-oriented supportive housing if that’s what the resident wants. I’m grateful to Supervisor Dorsey and recovery community members from all across San Francisco for their leadership and advocacy on this worthy legislation.”