San Francisco’s open-air drug problem is chronic, lethal, and seemingly impossible to cure. The latest attempt at mitigation is Supervisor Matt Dorsey’s Drug-free Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) proposal. The legislation is cosponsored by Board President Rafael Mandelman and Supervisors Stephen Sherrill, Danny Sauter, Bilal Mahmood and Alan Wong.
Dorsey’s proposal aims to shift San Francisco away from its current universal “harm-reduction-only” model. It introduces an Alternative Funding Pathway that stops city funding for new site-based PSH developments unless they incorporate a lease provision prohibiting on-site illicit drug use.
Initially introduced in April, the proposal immediately irked Jennifer Friedenbach, executive director of the Coalition on Homelessness. After a full board vote in May, the legislation was sent back to the committee to incorporate substantial amendments.
The fourth version of the ordinance was reviewed on July 9 at the Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee hearing. Dorsey, Sauter, and Wong attended. The four primary objectives of Dorsey’s proposal:
– Require new city-funded PSH to prohibit illicit drug use on the site.
– Guarantee that no resident of drug-free PSH would be evicted for a single relapse.
– Survey residents to quantify their choice for drug-free or drug-tolerant housing options.
– Establish city policy that will meet residents’ demand for drug-free and drug-tolerant options.
Of the approximately 9,000 units of PSH in San Francisco, nearly all are considered drug-tolerant, meaning they allow tenants to use illegal substances. It’s a provision of the Housing First policy, which was adopted at the federal level in 2014. This policy ensures that homeless people are prioritized for housing, with no expectation of sobriety or treatment.
“The only way is to be in an environment where I can be clean and sober. Everybody deserves that environment. San Francisco deserves better.” — TRP Academy participant
The intention of such rule-free housing is that once a person has been placed indoors, they will be offered help to maintain stability. On paper, it should improve their well-being. In reality, deep flaws have emerged. The choice between leaving vulnerable people on the streets and putting them within four walls hasn’t been the hoped-for panacea.
Data collected by the Voice of San Francisco and Mothers Against Drug Addiction and Deaths cofounder Gina McDonald show that 784 people lost their lives to overdose in drug-tolerant PSH between 2020 and 2025.
In response, the intention behind drug-free PSH is to give people who struggle with addiction to street drugs and homelessness the opportunity to maintain sobriety and live in a safe space. Legal substances such as alcohol and medically assisted treatment (MAT) will be permitted.
Friedenbach still objects, and in a July 7 Facebook post, she urged people to attend the meeting:
Join us on Thursday for the last opportunity to give public comment and tell our elected officials that we demand no evictions for return to use in permanent supportive housing!! Everyone deserves care, dignity and a home while they recover. Evicting for drug use will only increase street homelessness and leave people without support or services.
At the meeting, Dorsey once again made the case for his legislation, explaining that he has made amendments in response to concerns. In an interview after the hearing, Dorsey said he has believes he has enough cosponsors to secure passage.
“I think even the objections I heard today feel to me more minor than they had been in months past,” he said. “Some of the recommended amendments included things like postponing the whole thing until we did a survey and making a pilot program. Today I think we’re being asked for things that are nibbling around the edges.”
Dorsey added that public opinion data is clear: “We have data for what San Franciscans want,” he said. “If it ever went to the voters it would be very clear about where they would be. People want drug-free supportive housing.”
The biggest sticking point remains the provision that a person would be asked to leave if they relapse and use more than once. Dorsey said allowing for perpetual relapses would defeat the purpose.
“If we were to authorize perpetual relapses in drug-free housing, it ceases to be drug-free housing,” he said. “We have to protect the integrity of a drug-free environment if it will offer benefits to the people who are seeking it. It’s not just people in recovery. It’s family members, especially with children.”
Dorsey also pointed to conditions in existing drug-tolerant buildings.
“There’s a guy on social media who takes videos; he’s in a drug-tolerant building and if you look at what’s playing out just in the hallways, it’s a very chaotic drug scene that’s going on,” he said. “It’s very disruptive to the community. There are also externalities around drug use that play out in the neighborhoods. Some of the worst offenders have rates of calls for service that are just police calls at two per day. That’s an extraordinarily high call-for-service rate at a residential facility. We know what that is. It’s all drugs.”
Dorsey also emphasized that a recent citywide survey found that 69 percent of respondents said they want drug-free housing.
Despite Friedenbach’s call to action, the majority of the people who spoke during public comment supported the legislation. Many came from the TRP Academy, an abstinence-based reentry therapeutic teaching community and transitional housing program.
“Drug-free housing should be mandatory,” said one TRP Academy participant. “The only way is to be in an environment where I can be clean and sober. Everybody deserves the environment. San Francisco deserves better,” said another.
Richard Beale, cofounder of Brothers Against Drug Deaths, is nearly 31 years sober and said he believes everyone deserves an environment where accountability can grow. He then led a “Recovery first” chant in the chambers.
Another commenter in favor of the legislation noted that “when an individual’s lifestyle choices affect society, society must intervene.”
Opposing the measure was “Junebug” Kealoha with the Coalition on Homelessness. She claimed that “housing is a human right, housing is recovery,” and that using substances should not be a reason for removal from PSH. Others were fine with the proposal but thought the number of acceptable relapses should be expanded to two or more.
At the end of the hearing, Dorsey, Sauter and Wong approved the proposal, which will go to the full board on Tuesday, July 14.
