Officers were instructed to take action to clear homeless encampments in a notice this morning sent to all members of the San Francisco Police Department by Chief Bill Scott.
Police are “encouraged” to provide “persons experiencing homelessness” with a department-provided card describing city homeless services, but they are “not required to do so.”
Then-Supervisor Mark Farrell’s Proposition Q of 2016 requires the city to provide residents of encampments with notice of their removal 24 hours in advance of any action. It also requires that any personal property be stored for up to 90 days. “That is not happening,” said John Do, a senior attorney at the ACLU of Northern California.
A series of encampment sweeps this week indicate that the city is preparing to take a harder line.
The notice “reveals some very shocking omissions and contradictions of what the city has been telling the public,” Do added.
Since the June 28 U.S. Supreme Court ruling undermining that injunction and clearing the way for cities to crack down on street-dwellers, San Francisco officials have repeatedly stated that homeless encampments would be addressed with a “service first,” rather than “citation and jail first,” approach. This notice suggests otherwise, Do said.
Previous guidance encouraging police to document encampment conditions and police activity during encampment removals was absent from today’s notice, Do said. Police, instead, were merely reminded to “activate their body-worn cameras.”
The notice comes after Mayor London Breed announced in July that a “very aggressive” policy of clearing tents would commence in August.
This morning’s five-page departmental notice informs SFPD officers about enforcement options for people “sitting, lying, sleeping, or lodging” on public property following the Supreme Court ruling and the July 29 lifting of an injunction on some criminal charges when removing homeless people from city streets.
Officers “are reminded to take enforcement action against any criminal activity or conduct observed while addressing lodging, encampments, encampments on public streets, sidewalks, plazas, or other public property or blocking access to those areas,” the report concludes.
In advance of August’s “very aggressive” operations, city officials appear to already be ramping up street enforcement actions. Yesterday, police and Public Works employees cleared a purported five encampments from under the Central Freeway. While a Department of Emergency Management spokesperson says that all unhoused people were offered shelter, street-dwellers interviewed afterward disputed this.
Video of the action taken by the San Francisco Standard revealed a police officer chastising a bedraggled homeless man and stating that Mayor London Breed and Gov. Gavin Newsom had declared that homeless encampments are “no more.”
Also yesterday, the San Francisco Chronicle witnessed the arrest and citation of a San Francisco homeless man who refused an offer of city services. In full view of the reporter, city workers disposed of the man’s tents, blankets, clothing and other possessions, in apparent violation of the city’s “bag and tag” policy.
When asked to reckon the Chronicle article and video with that policy, Public Works spokeswoman Rachel Gordon insisted that “our crews adhere to the bag and tag policy.”
Breed previously said large-scale enforcement would be delayed until August, so city employees could be trained not to improperly confiscate or throw away homeless people’s items — the very act city workers apparently undertook in front of a Chronicle reporter, who recorded the proceedings.
Breed noted this month that training is necessary, as city workers failing to adhere to the “bag and tag policy” and improperly disposing of homeless people’s things had led to numerous legal payouts of $10,000 to $20,000 a pop.
This week, San Francisco’s Healthy Streets Operation Center (HSOC), tasked with coordinating the efforts of several city agencies addressing homelessness, plans to clear almost 100 tents and structures.
The agency estimated that about 60 homeless individuals would need shelter following the sweeps as there may be more tents than people, per a schedule obtained by Mission Local. HSOC reported there are presently some 300 shelter beds available.
The city’s policy of making an offer of shelter requires available shelter beds to offer. Spokespeople from both the Department of Emergency Management and Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing said there are enough beds for this week. Continuing availability, however, depends upon how many offers are accepted and how long homeless people stay within shelters.
“As we see engagement on the street increase, bed availability will depend on how many people accept offers of shelter,” explained Emily Cohen, the homelessness department’s deputy director for communications.
Unhoused people are still given the traditional 72-hour notice before their tents are removed from city streets, a Department of Emergency Management spokesperson said. The weekly schedule, usually compiled four days in advance, is not posted publicly, however, as it is subject to change.
Mayoral challengers Daniel Lurie and Aaron Peskin both derided yesterday’s much-covered homeless encampment removals as performative.
“Policies to address homelessness must be humane, lawful and effective — not just implemented because someone’s job is on the line,” wrote Peskin. “In an effort to get re-elected, Mayor Breed and former Mayor Farrell are advocating for failed policies from the past that simply sweep our homeless problem from one neighborhood to the other, without any long-term solutions.”
Added Lurie, “San Franciscans aren’t going to be fooled by a publicity stunt after six years of failure.”
This story was updated with photos of the Aug. 1 encampment clearing actions.
Rob them of what? I’ve walked by a thousand of these encampments and I don’t think their family jewels or high school yearbooks are in those piles of garbage. This stuff strewn across the sidewalk is a combination of clothes/food given to them by social workers, shit they found in a dumpster and tourist’s luggage. The humane approach HAS NOT WORKED. The citizens of this beautiful city can’t be held hostage by the Coalition on Homelessness any longer. Deal with reality
A thousand? One day soon enough someone will diminish you…..your $3million dollar home, your outfit……..your job….your kid or your dog. What will you do then my darling? How will you convince anyone that you matter?
How about you “embed” a reporter with the police and clean up teams to give us reporting that includes all the context of how much notice these homeless people are given, and a real view of what the “belonging” are made up of? First question a reporter could answer is “if those belongings were in your house what would you do with them?”.
For years, San Francisco policy has encouraged people to privatize our public space. Had we had sensible policy to begin with, the realities of the moment would not be so harsh. The NIMBYs have failed us creating a housing shortage and soaring housing prices. Policies like Housing First (which put funds into supportive housing over building more shelters) and Harm Reduction have created what I think most San Franciscans would characterize as untenable conditions on our streets. After volunteering with HSOC, I would say that the people who work there are compassionate and thoughtful and would not cause spiteful cruelty to the disadvantaged as this article suggests. However, if offered shelter there is no excuse to stay on the street. Period. We let the situation get so out of hand that businesses are leaving, people are moving out, and San Franciscans are fed up. Retail, up everywhere else, is down in SF. It’s about time we cleared our streets. By the way, the street pictured above is what ‘normal’ looks like.
Some really ignorant comments on here by sheltered people who were lucky to be dealt a decent hand and have never been close to ending up on the street, or even acknowledged a homeless person as a human being enough to have a normal conversation with them in a way that might lead them to actually understand homelessness enough to offer an opinion on it besides “iTs bEcAuSe ThEyRe aLL oN dRuGs!!” …Yeah, no.
People aren’t refusing housing because they just love urban camping and doing drugs. There’s no such thing as “drug tourism” where people are coming here like it’s a homeless vacation destination to sample the local crack offerings. No one chooses this. People don’t want to be out here any more than you want them to be out here.
People are not “refusing to be housed.” They are refusing to be institutionalized. Any shelter or housing provided by the government nearly always comes with strings attached and usually involves entering some obligatory program, counseling, rehab, monitoring or other measures of infantilizing scrutiny that are often intrusive to privacy and infringe on one’s autonomy. Not everyone wants or needs this level of institutional involvement to dictate their life and choices- many just need a stable, secure base to build a new life on, where they can feel safe and have dignity without unwanted intrusion- either from the constant chaotic things happening outside their tent, or the government telling them how to live their lives.
Typical of the SFPD. I was labeled the Nightmare Neighbor because I had a downstairs apartment even though it wasn’t rented out. Cops made a daily siege around my house just to intimate and harass me because I was a community activist who had been appointed by the City to deal with the garbage company and also was Vice Chairman of Police Community Relations as a watchdog for the PD. I was also appointed to the San Francisco Airport Noise Committee along with the Local Health risk Committee which developed a HazMat plan for the City. For my thanks, I was arrested 3 times with the City Attorney and Officer Holly Stoumen writing false police reports that Judge Moscone decided he was mislead on and dismissed all charges. I spent over $100,000 to defend myself. They even planted drugs in my house and charged me with being a drug dealer which was also thrown out. They caused so much animosity that they even burned my house down in an attempt to drive me out. I guess the message was to not investigate police wrongdoing. Now it’s time to violate civil rights of any under class they can find. First it was the Black community, then the war activists, then community activists and now the people who can’t defend themselves. Typical thug mentality. The City of Brotherly Love. Just another dystopian society like Nazi Germany. I love it here in Florida. No one bothers anyone. Take filthy City and let it die it’s natural death during the next earthquake or forest fire with all its yellow journalism.
Too often the personal possessions of the homeless entail the refuse a resident placed on the sidewalk for scheduled collection. We see homeless sites with broken sofas, discarded mattresses, end tables, etc , etc., etc. These aren’t items to be stored at public expense, especially not for months on end.
I seriously don’t get it. Ok, you want to be aggressive and clean up all the encampments, zero tolerance – fine. Follow the approved policy for notice, offering shelter, and saving people’s belongings. Then you still get a clear street and there’s no legal risk, less opportunity for public criticism, and (lest we forget) you’ve treated human beings more humanely. Why not do this?? Unless, and I hate to make the comparison, but is it that “the cruelty is the point”?
Sadly…….it is. The point is to try and break and punish these human beings. Which means that like many war veterans……..they will NEVER be able to return to human society again. Do we really want to do that to our fellow human beings? I don’t.
They refuse shelter placement because you CAN NOT SMOKE CRACK IN THE SHELTERS! “Personal belongings “? I walk by 3 of these daily and they are littered with garbage, human waste, stolen luggage from tourists and dumpster finds. Get them out of here already. The program we tried didn’t work, they refuse shelter beds and help, move them out!
interesting that Newsom, Breed, and other Demo Regime hauchos should be grateful
to a Trump Supreme Court for a remedy, thus pulling the aforementioned coals out
of the fire.
Peskin and Lurie are right: This kind of bullying, intimidation, and robbery of people experiencing homelessness isn’t just cruel, it’s stupid. It achieves nothing. Politicians like Breed looking for quick PR wins have been pulling this stunt for 30 years and that’s how we got where we are today in the first place. What solves homelessness is homes. Everyone deserves to live with dignity.
While I agree that affordable housing will help solve homelessness, perhaps people need to move to a housing market they can afford. I (and the bank) used to own a lovely condo here in SF. When I retired, I couldn’t afford it anymore and now live in a tiny rental. If I couldn’t afford this, I would move to another city. This isn’t rocket science.
That’s because it’s not about housing, it’s about being able to do drugs with impunity without the inconvenience of working to pay for rent.
Scott, have you ever been poor? Moving is not cheap, and why should someone who lived here and lost their job and home be forced to leave?
The cruelty I see in these comments make me sick and pray I never lose my apartment as I will be on the street too.
But, drugs here are cheaper and there used to be plenty of stores and shops the addicts could steal from. There’s a logic to their behavior: free street lodging; close proximity to cheap drugs; close proximity to free sources of food and funds; social tolerance, without personal consequence.