A Publication of the Coalition on Homelessness
by Lukas Illa
On December 10, for the first time in its history, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors overturned a decision passed by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority (SFMTA) Board of Directors that would have banned oversized vehicles citywide.
The move prevented the ban from taking effect. It would have targeted streets in the Lake Merced area after vehicle-dwelling San Franciscans were swept from the area earlier this year.
by Julian Highsmith
San Francisco took a monumental step forward in addressing its homelessness crisis this week as the Board of Supervisors approved new legislation on a 10-0 vote to extend the duration of rapid rehousing subsidies from two to five years. This landmark decision promises greater stability for families at risk of returning to homelessness by providing longer-term financial support, ensuring they have the time and resources necessary to transition into permanent housing.
The 2024 election is likely to be recorded in history as the year of the billionaires. Their money has influenced this year’s ballot from presidential contests to state and local races.
But even people with ten-figure net worth didn’t get everything they wanted.
Daniel Lurie prevailed in San Francisco’s mayoral race. Lurie is an heir to the Levi Strauss fortune, and spent over $8 million in his largely self-financed campaign.
San Francisco elected Daniel Lurie mayor. On January 3, 2025, he will assume office and inherit a homelessness crisis that has long bedeviled previous administrations.
The City’s approach to homelessness was a key issue of Lurie’s campaign—as well as those of his opponents. Since the Supreme Court’s ruling on Grants Pass v. Johnson, incumbent Mayor London Breed called for a “get tough” approach—or get even tougher,
In response to the alarming rise in family homelessness, Supervisor Hilary Ronen, with support from the Coalition on Homelessness, introduced new legislation at the San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting on October 22 to extend critical housing subsidies for families in need. The proposed ordinance amends the City’s Administrative Code to provide up to five years of rapid rehousing assistance for eligible families, addressing the increasing number of families at risk of returning to homelessness due to short-term housing subsidies.
by Jordan Davis
At the September 24 Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Matt Dorsey pulled yet another policy out of his rear end that sounds reasonable on the surface, but in reality further stigmatizes permanent supportive housing (PSH) residents.
Hot off the heels of his proposed legislation to stifle PSH development unless a certain percentage is dedicated to drug recovery housing, Dorsey announced that he was requesting that legislation be drafted that would require that PSH disclose so-called “drug-tolerant”
by Madeleine Matz
Proposition D, a San Francisco ballot measure that would scrap the City’s system of oversight boards, commissions and committees, is antithetical to our local democracy. It should be an easy ‘no’ vote.
First, Prop. D’s origin is sticky with the right wing’s fingerprints. As SPUR notes, Prop. D was drafted by TogetherSF, a political action committee heavily financed by the billionaire Michael Moritz,
by the SF League of Pissed Off Voters
Our friends at The San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters recently released its periodic guide with recommendations on important ballot propositions. In this edition, Street Sheet reprints an abbreviated version focusing on housing and local governance.
Prop. D: No! (see accompanying opinion in this issue) It’s San Francisco’s very own Project 2025. It was put on the ballot by MAGA Mark Farrell for three reasons: as a slush fund to launder money from his sleazy Republican donors;
by Hollie Garrett
I watched the correctional officers from the sliver of the cell door window as they strapped on their rubber gloves and set up their metal detectors in preparation of the mass search. I had known this would be coming for days, but that did not simmer the anxiety and stress I felt in my chest and stomach as I watched them prepare to shatter any sense of privacy I may have developed during my stay in this prison.
by Stop the Sweeps
We know one main thing: shelter is not being offered to most people being swept from street encampments in the US. There are hardly ever enough shelter spaces available.
According to a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in the case Martin v. Boise — a decision currently at risk of being struck down in the case Grants Pass v. Johnson — cities cannot legally sweep people if they are not able to offer every individual shelter.
