So now what? San Francisco’s tent city ballot measures
What are the supervisors offering voters this November?
The status quo is that San Francisco has tent cities.
It’s not only because San Francisco doesn’t have enough beds to accommodate people experiencing homelessness, but the city also doesn’t have the law enforcement resources necessary to clear all of the tent cities all of the time, as Randy Shaw notes in Beyond Chron. Neither of the two ballot measures before voters in November create an obligation on the part of the city, or provide funds for the city, to clear tent cities, improve conditions in them, or to build more beds.
If you think Farrell’s measure will clear tent cities, it won’t, because it doesn’t provide any new law enforcement funding. If you think Peskin’s measure will create new shelters, or improve existing conditions in tent cities, it won’t, because it doesn’t provide any new shelter funding, nor does it impose an obligation on San Francisco to clean or monitor tent cities.
What do the ballot measures do?
Both ballot measures describe and standardize the process for clearing tent cities and articulate conditions under which clearing encampments is permitted. Therefore, they are both improvements on the status quo. Currently there’s no specific regulation around tent city clearance. Typically city workers give encampment residents 24–72 hours notice that their encampment will be cleared. After the noted time period, city workers return to the site, force out the inhabitants with threat of arrest, and throw away any personal belongings they find still at the site. Tent city cleared.
Minimum conditions for removing an encampment
Under both proposals, a tent city can be cleared if …
Farrell: Shelter is available for the people in the subject encampment, no duration specified.
Peskin: Shelter is available for the people in the encampment until they are transitioned to permanent housing, and no one was already on the waiting list for this shelter.
Critics of Peskin’s measure claim that his pre-conditions will make it impossible to ever move a tent city. I think that’s overstating the case. Peskin’s measure doesn’t require the tent city inhabitants accept the city’s offer of shelter, it doesn’t require the shelter to be convenient or appealing. It does require the city bring new shelter space online before clearing a tent city. Mayor Lee’s pre-Super Bowl tent city sweeps would be legal under Peskin’s ballot measure, because San Francisco opened Pier 80 before the sweeps started.
Notice requirements
When clearing a tent city, San Francisco must give encampment residents at least …
Farrell: 24 hours notice.
Peskin: 72 hours notice.
Currently there is no notice requirement at all, so either of these ballot measures will be an improvement from the point of view of tent city residents.
Personal property
Letter for letter, the two ballot measures are exactly the same on the subject of personal property. Under either measure city workers will no longer be permitted to confiscate or throw away residents’ personal property (unless it is contraband, evidence of a crime, or a threat to public health). City workers are required to store the personal property they find at encampments for 90 days free of charge, and post information about where the property is being stored. This is a dramatic improvement over the status quo.
If these two measures are so similar …
… why can’t the supervisors just agree on reforms and pass them at the board?
Why indeed! One simple reason — GOTV (get out the vote). The only thing people in San Francisco are more mad about than rent is homelessness. Farrell’s ballot measure has a little more public safety flavor, Peskin’s a little more social justice. Both can be used by their respective authors to motivate voters. “Homelessness! Terrible! Vote for [Farrell or Peskin]’s ballot measure! While you’re there vote for [Wiener or Kim] for State Senate!”
This election season, you’ll have many opportunities to fight bitterly with your friends and co-workers, but these ballot measures aren’t one of them! They’re both improvements over the status quo. Pick whichever one you like.
Here is a table comparing the ballot measures with Avalos’s measure, and the status quo.
