A bill with strong San Francisco roots went down in flames last week when Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed Assembly Bill 255, The Supportive-Recovery Residence Program. The bill, introduced by San Francisco Assemblyman Matt Haney (District 17), with colleague Catherine Stefani (District 17) as principal coauthor, would have authorized the state to fund supportive-recovery residences that prioritize abstinence and recovery from addiction.
Amid a raging drug epidemic on the streets, the bill was an attempt to free up a 10 percent slice of state funding to cities and counties to focus on this recovery approach, while the rest of that funding would have remained committed to the housing first concept, which prioritizes housing and does not require abstinence or treatment for addiction.
In September, Haney posted to Instagram that “If somebody wants to get off drugs, we should have a placement for them where they can be away from drugs. Not force them to be in an environment where drug use is openly allowed.”
Following the governor’s veto on Oct. 1, Haney issued a statement expressing disappointment: “This bill was about giving people in recovery a real choice to have safe, sober housing when they need it. Californians who are working hard to stay sober are often forced into housing where drug use is allowed, and that puts their recovery and their lives at risk.”
A key area of disagreement between Haney and Newsom appears to be what is possible under existing state laws and programs.
In his official veto message, the governor said the bill would “create a new category of ‘supportive recovery residences,’ allow up to 25 percent of state homelessness funds to support them, and set up a new certification and oversight system.” (Newsom might have been citing an earlier version of the bill; AB 255 would have allowed only 10 percent of those funds to be redirected.)
Newsom added that recovery-focused housing is an essential part of a response to homelessness, but “Current law already permits local jurisdictions to receive funding within the Housing First framework, and recent guidance allows support for recovery housing without creating a duplicative and costly new statutory category. Establishing a separate certification and oversight process wrongly suggests incompatibility with Housing First, while imposing fees that would not cover implementation costs.”
Haney was not convinced. “The Governor’s [veto] message states that current law allows for state investments in recovery housing,” said Haney, “yet unfortunately that is not the understanding shared by housing providers themselves, the legislature, the cities, counties and their attorneys, or people seeking recovery housing.”
A key area of disagreement between Haney and Newsom appears to be what is possible under existing state laws and programs.
Newsom offered to keep working with Haney and his coauthors to support recovery-based housing that doesn’t conflict with housing first, and Haney seemed open to getting clearer guidance from the governor.
Housing first is far from a universally respected approach to homelessness. Writing in City Journal, Devon Kurtz noted in 2024 that several states ditched housing first policies. The state of Florida “forbids its state homelessness funding from being used for Housing First; instead the state will redirect more than $30 million annually to transitional housing and other treatment-oriented programs.” Georgia and Utah have also directed millions to nonhousing-first programs.
The issue remains a battlefield across the country. The National Low Income Housing Coalition cites 26 studies purporting to show that housing first programs “decreased homelessness by 88% and improved housing stability by 41%, compared to Treatment First programs.” Similarly, in 2023, the pre-Hegseth, pre-Trump Department of Veterans Affairs touted its dedication to housing-first, treatment-later programs.
Now throw into the mix an executive order by President Donald Trump in July. Declaring that “The Federal Government and the States have spent tens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness but not its root causes, leaving other citizens vulnerable to public safety threats,” the president said the secretaries of Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development would be, among other things, “ending support for ‘housing first’ policies that deprioritize accountability and fail to promote treatment, recovery, and self-sufficiency.”
Headline of the week
“From Forbes 30 Under 30 to Cell Block D: How 5 Former Wunderkinds Swapped Pricey Mansions for Federal Prison”
— Kelsi Karruli, Realtor.com “News & Insights”
Go figure
70,746: number of housing units San Francisco Planning says are in the “pipeline,” with 17,378 being labeled as affordable (SF Planning) . . . 3,130: number of units in San Francisco under construction . . . 11 percent: increase in San Francisco apartment rents over the past year (Compass) . . . $1,302,500: median sales price of all home types in San Francisco in August 2025 (Redfin) . . . 297.5 percent: increase from first quarter of 2012 to second quarter of 2025 in the minimum annual income needed in the San Francisco Bay Area to afford to purchase a median-priced single family home; that’s an increase from $90,370 to $359,200 (California Association of Realtors) . . . $18 million: price of a mansion on Staten Island built in the late 1970s for the late Gambino crime boss Paul “Big Paul” Castellano. Listing agent Melsa Skrapalliu told the New York Post that the home “is not just a testament to its famous past; it is a vibrant, emotionally resonant environment where memories were made and lives were lived. Selling this property means passing on a legacy of beauty, warmth and joy, offering the next owners a place to create their own lasting memories.” (Realtor.com)
Say what?
“So much has changed in the last five years to make Las Vegas a more desirable destination for wealthy individuals . . . Now, a $3 million home is not much of a big deal — it’s a relatively pedestrian price point.”
— Real Estate agent Bryan Lebo, “Million-dollar homes are the fastest-moving part of the housing market as wealth gap grows” (Yahoo Finance)
