On Dec. 23, 2022, San Francisco&#8217;s unsheltered population got a Christmas present of sorts: They were allowed to continue to sleep on the city&#8217;s sidewalks.

core/paragraph

On Dec. 23, 2022, San Francisco's unsheltered population got a Christmas present of sorts: They were allowed to continue to sleep on the city's sidewalks.

On Dec. 23, 2022, San Francisco&#8217;s unsheltered population got a Christmas present of sorts: They were allowed to continue to sleep on the city&#8217;s sidewalks.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu forbade the city from enforcing, or threatening to enforce, a variety of laws and ordinances that would otherwise &#8220;prohibit involuntarily homeless individuals from sitting, lying, or sleeping on public property.&#8221;

U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu forbade the city from enforcing, or threatening to enforce, a variety of laws and ordinances that would otherwise "prohibit involuntarily homeless individuals from sitting, lying, or sleeping on public property."

U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna Ryu forbade the city from enforcing, or threatening to enforce, a variety of laws and ordinances that would otherwise &#8220;prohibit involuntarily homeless individuals from sitting, lying, or sleeping on public property.&#8221;

The order came in the form of a preliminary injunction in a federal lawsuit brought against the city by the Coalition on Homelessness, an advocacy organization, and a number of individuals, some formerly homeless.

The order came in the form of a preliminary injunction in a federal lawsuit brought against the city by the Coalition on Homelessness, an advocacy organization, and a number of individuals, some formerly homeless.

The injunction was preliminary in that there had not yet been a full trial on the merits—that was at least a year away—but Ryu found the conditions were so bad and plaintiffs so likely to ultimately win, that it was in the public interest to enter temporary relief until the full trial could be held.&nbsp;

The injunction was preliminary in that there had not yet been a full trial on the merits—that was at least a year away—but Ryu found the conditions were so bad and plaintiffs so likely to ultimately win, that it was in the public interest to enter temporary relief until the full trial could be held.&nbsp;

The judge based her ruling on the fact that the city did not have sufficient beds to provide shelter for the city&#8217;s unsheltered population and therefore enforcing the sit/lie/sleep laws against the plaintiffs was punishing them for the status of being homeless. In her opinion, that violated the Eighth Amendment&#8217;s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The judge based her ruling on the fact that the city did not have sufficient beds to provide shelter for the city's unsheltered population and therefore enforcing the sit/lie/sleep laws against the plaintiffs was punishing them for the status of being homeless. In her opinion, that violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The judge based her ruling on the fact that the city did not have sufficient beds to provide shelter for the city&#8217;s unsheltered population and therefore enforcing the sit/lie/sleep laws against the plaintiffs was punishing them for the status of being homeless. In her opinion, that violated the Eighth Amendment&#8217;s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

READ MORE: <a href="https://sfstandard.com/public-health/heres-what-unfolds-when-san-francisco-homeless-encampments-get-cleaned/">Here’s What Unfolds When San Francisco Homeless Encampments Get Cleaned</a>

READ MORE: <a href="https://sfstandard.com/public-health/heres-what-unfolds-when-san-francisco-homeless-encampments-get-cleaned/">Here’s What Unfolds When San Francisco Homeless Encampments Get Cleaned</a>

The city&#8217;s reaction was swift. San Francisco Mayor London Breed said flatly, &#8220;Mayors cannot run cities this way.&#8221;

The city's reaction was swift. San Francisco Mayor London Breed said flatly, "Mayors cannot run cities this way."

The city&#8217;s reaction was swift. San Francisco Mayor London Breed said flatly, &#8220;Mayors cannot run cities this way.&#8221;

San Francisco&#8217;s City Attorney David Chiu took the relatively unusual step of issuing his own press release.

San Francisco's City Attorney David Chiu took the relatively unusual step of issuing his own press release.

San Francisco&#8217;s City Attorney David Chiu took the relatively unusual step of issuing his own press release.

Chiu said that the judge&#8217;s order put the city in an &#8220;impossible situation&#8221; and announced he was immediately filing a motion to get relief from an expansive reading of her order.

Chiu said that the judge's order put the city in an "impossible situation" and announced he was immediately filing a motion to get relief from an expansive reading of her order.

Chiu said that the judge&#8217;s order put the city in an &#8220;impossible situation&#8221; and announced he was immediately filing a motion to get relief from an expansive reading of her order.

Five months have now passed since the press release, and Chiu has had little luck getting any relief from the court&#8217;s ruling. Some of the difficulty is because he is stuck with &#8220;bad facts,&#8221; as lawyers like to say, and some of it is because a few strategic decisions have backfired.

Five months have now passed since the press release, and Chiu has had little luck getting any relief from the court's ruling. Some of the difficulty is because he is stuck with "bad facts," as lawyers like to say, and some of it is because a few strategic decisions have backfired.

Five months have now passed since the press release, and Chiu has had little luck getting any relief from the court&#8217;s ruling. Some of the difficulty is because he is stuck with &#8220;bad facts,&#8221; as lawyers like to say, and some of it is because a few strategic decisions have backfired.

But there is a much larger question to ask about the city attorney&#8217;s strategy: does it actually make sense to try to win this case?&nbsp;&nbsp;

But there is a much larger question to ask about the city attorney's strategy: does it actually make sense to try to win this case?&nbsp;&nbsp;

But there is a much larger question to ask about the city attorney&#8217;s strategy: does it actually make sense to try to win this case?&nbsp;&nbsp;

Thus far, it looks like this may be one of those cases where the best way to win is by not winning.

Thus far, it looks like this may be one of those cases where the best way to win is by not winning.

San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu speaks at a press meeting held at City Hall about San Francisco’s victory against Walgreens regarding the company’s responsibility in the opioid epidemic in San Francisco Calif., on Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2022_Aug_10_Opioid_Presser-6-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-67378"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu speaks at a press conference in August 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

core/image

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/2022_Aug_10_Opioid_Presser-6-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-67378"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu speaks at a press conference in August 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-public-litigation">Public Litigation&nbsp;</h2>

core/heading

<h2 id="h-public-litigation">Public Litigation&nbsp;</h2>

High-stakes, high-visibility lawsuits involving governmental bodies, elected officials, large amounts of money and potential structural changes in the way government works—cases referred to as &#8220;public cases&#8221; or &#8220;public litigation&#8221;—are like mountains so tall that they make their own weather.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

High-stakes, high-visibility lawsuits involving governmental bodies, elected officials, large amounts of money and potential structural changes in the way government works—cases referred to as "public cases" or "public litigation"—are like mountains so tall that they make their own weather.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

High-stakes, high-visibility lawsuits involving governmental bodies, elected officials, large amounts of money and potential structural changes in the way government works—cases referred to as &#8220;public cases&#8221; or &#8220;public litigation&#8221;—are like mountains so tall that they make their own weather.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

Coalition of Homelessness, et al. v. City of San Francisco, et al. was one of those cases. It cut to the core of one of the most intractable, expensive, frustrating, painful, depressing, divisive, and monumental problems that the city had ever faced.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Coalition of Homelessness, et al. v. City of San Francisco, et al. was one of those cases. It cut to the core of one of the most intractable, expensive, frustrating, painful, depressing, divisive, and monumental problems that the city had ever faced.&nbsp;&nbsp;

You could go back to Mayor Dianne Feinstein&#8217;s efforts in 1982 to launch faith-based emergency shelters and soup kitchens and roll it forward, mayor by mayor— Agnos, Jordan, Brown, Newsom, Lee, Breed—one after another, each putting out a new program and spending millions and millions to address the problem of citizens sleeping on the street. But for all the effort and spending the problem would not go away.

You could go back to Mayor Dianne Feinstein's efforts in 1982 to launch faith-based emergency shelters and soup kitchens and roll it forward, mayor by mayor— Agnos, Jordan, Brown, Newsom, Lee, Breed—one after another, each putting out a new program and spending millions and millions to address the problem of citizens sleeping on the street. But for all the effort and spending the problem would not go away.

You could go back to Mayor Dianne Feinstein&#8217;s efforts in 1982 to launch faith-based emergency shelters and soup kitchens and roll it forward, mayor by mayor— Agnos, Jordan, Brown, Newsom, Lee, Breed—one after another, each putting out a new program and spending millions and millions to address the problem of citizens sleeping on the street. But for all the effort and spending the problem would not go away.

It was profoundly embarrassing to the self-esteem of the city—this was, after all, the place of big ideas, of innovation, the place that changes the world—but all of those things had not been enough to turn the tide.&nbsp;

It was profoundly embarrassing to the self-esteem of the city—this was, after all, the place of big ideas, of innovation, the place that changes the world—but all of those things had not been enough to turn the tide.&nbsp;

And now in a sign of how thoroughly the city&#8217;s leaders—one by one—had failed, this problem had bounced from City Hall to the federal courthouse where the city&#8217;s political leadership would not be leading; they&#8217;d be reacting to what some unelected judge said.

And now in a sign of how thoroughly the city's leaders—one by one—had failed, this problem had bounced from City Hall to the federal courthouse where the city's political leadership would not be leading; they'd be reacting to what some unelected judge said.

And now in a sign of how thoroughly the city&#8217;s leaders—one by one—had failed, this problem had bounced from City Hall to the federal courthouse where the city&#8217;s political leadership would not be leading; they&#8217;d be reacting to what some unelected judge said.

A Department of Public Works employee speaks with a man before encampment clearing on Tuesday, April 25, 2023 in the Mission District in San Francisco. The city gave Ryan and his partner until Friday to move their encampment. City workers bulldozed a line of tents in a SoMa alleyway enraging activists in a move that may have defied a federal court order banning the involuntary displacement of homeless people. | David Sjostedt/The Standard

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/IMG_3775-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-153858"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A Department of Public Works employee speaks with a man before clearing an encampment clearing on April 25, 2023, in the Mission District in San Francisco. City workers bulldozed a line of tents in a SoMa alleyway, enraging activists. | David Sjostedt/The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/IMG_3775-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-153858"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A Department of Public Works employee speaks with a man before clearing an encampment clearing on April 25, 2023, in the Mission District in San Francisco. City workers bulldozed a line of tents in a SoMa alleyway, enraging activists. | David Sjostedt/The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-dogfight">Dogfight&nbsp;</h2>

From the very start, it was clear that the city attorney&#8217;s office was in for a dogfight.

From the very start, it was clear that the city attorney's office was in for a dogfight.

From the very start, it was clear that the city attorney&#8217;s office was in for a dogfight.

The plaintiffs were no ragtag bunch of hippies and do-gooders stumbling into federal court. The Coalition on Homelessness had been around for 35 years and was led by Jennifer Friedenbach, a smart, capable and tough woman with a 25-year history of community organizing around housing, welfare rights, disability, and homelessness issues.

The plaintiffs were no ragtag bunch of hippies and do-gooders stumbling into federal court. The Coalition on Homelessness had been around for 35 years and was led by Jennifer Friedenbach, a smart, capable and tough woman with a 25-year history of community organizing around housing, welfare rights, disability, and homelessness issues.

They&#8217;d enlisted accomplished lawyers, including Zal Shroff, a former clinical lecturer at Yale Law School who worked at the Lawyers&#8217; Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, and John Do, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California. They also had a pro bono lawyer named Alfred C. Pfeiffer Jr. from Latham &amp; Watkins LLP.

They'd enlisted accomplished lawyers, including Zal Shroff, a former clinical lecturer at Yale Law School who worked at the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, and John Do, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California. They also had a pro bono lawyer named Alfred C. Pfeiffer Jr. from Latham &amp; Watkins LLP.

They&#8217;d enlisted accomplished lawyers, including Zal Shroff, a former clinical lecturer at Yale Law School who worked at the Lawyers&#8217; Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, and John Do, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California. They also had a pro bono lawyer named Alfred C. Pfeiffer Jr. from Latham &amp; Watkins LLP.

Latham was ranked No. 5 on Vault&#8217;s 2023 list of the top 100 American law firms, a 3,000-lawyer behemoth filled with lawyers who knew what they were doing in federal court.

Latham was ranked No. 5 on Vault's 2023 list of the top 100 American law firms, a 3,000-lawyer behemoth filled with lawyers who knew what they were doing in federal court.

Latham was ranked No. 5 on Vault&#8217;s 2023 list of the top 100 American law firms, a 3,000-lawyer behemoth filled with lawyers who knew what they were doing in federal court.

Lawyers from Latham had argued the seminal case of Martin v. Boise in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the case that said that a city cannot make criminal the practice of sleeping on city streets when there is no other practical place to go.

Lawyers from Latham had argued the seminal case of Martin v. Boise in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the case that said that a city cannot make criminal the practice of sleeping on city streets when there is no other practical place to go.

When plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on Sept. 27, 2022, they had been gathering evidence for more than two years. Their complaint was 101 pages. On the same day as the lawsuit, they filed their motion for a preliminary injunction. That filing was only 36 pages, but it had 970 pages of exhibits attached.

When plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on Sept. 27, 2022, they had been gathering evidence for more than two years. Their complaint was 101 pages. On the same day as the lawsuit, they filed their motion for a preliminary injunction. That filing was only 36 pages, but it had 970 pages of exhibits attached.

The plaintiffs alleged that despite city law and policy that forbid the city from clearing encampments without first giving notice and offering the displaced residents shelter, the city routinely conducted &#8220;sweeps&#8221; that closed encampments without providing either.

The plaintiffs alleged that despite city law and policy that forbid the city from clearing encampments without first giving notice and offering the displaced residents shelter, the city routinely conducted "sweeps" that closed encampments without providing either.

The plaintiffs alleged that despite city law and policy that forbid the city from clearing encampments without first giving notice and offering the displaced residents shelter, the city routinely conducted &#8220;sweeps&#8221; that closed encampments without providing either.

The plaintiffs submitted affidavits from people who had seen sweeps and been swept. Perhaps even more powerfully, they had affidavits from former city employees who observed the city&#8217;s sweeping practices and found them so inhumane that they were now offering testimony on behalf of the coalition.

The plaintiffs submitted affidavits from people who had seen sweeps and been swept. Perhaps even more powerfully, they had affidavits from former city employees who observed the city's sweeping practices and found them so inhumane that they were now offering testimony on behalf of the coalition.

The plaintiffs submitted affidavits from people who had seen sweeps and been swept. Perhaps even more powerfully, they had affidavits from former city employees who observed the city&#8217;s sweeping practices and found them so inhumane that they were now offering testimony on behalf of the coalition.

Among the exhibits to the motion was a 53-page declaration of Christopher John Herring, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California Los Angeles who focused his academic work on &#8220;homelessness, housing, poverty, criminal justice, and welfare.&#8221;

Among the exhibits to the motion was a 53-page declaration of Christopher John Herring, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California Los Angeles who focused his academic work on "homelessness, housing, poverty, criminal justice, and welfare."

Among the exhibits to the motion was a 53-page declaration of Christopher John Herring, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of California Los Angeles who focused his academic work on &#8220;homelessness, housing, poverty, criminal justice, and welfare.&#8221;

In an affidavit, he summarized some of the qualifications he brought to the assignment: &#8220;Between 2014 and 2015, I conducted an ethnographic study of San Francisco&#8217;s unhoused population. During the course of the study, I spent 57 nights sleeping out on sidewalks, parks, and beneath underpasses in San Francisco; 96 nights living among hundreds of other men in shelters; and 76 nights staying in daily or weekly hotels with people who were marginally housed.&#8221;

In an affidavit, he summarized some of the qualifications he brought to the assignment: "Between 2014 and 2015, I conducted an ethnographic study of San Francisco's unhoused population. During the course of the study, I spent 57 nights sleeping out on sidewalks, parks, and beneath underpasses in San Francisco; 96 nights living among hundreds of other men in shelters; and 76 nights staying in daily or weekly hotels with people who were marginally housed."

In an affidavit, he summarized some of the qualifications he brought to the assignment: &#8220;Between 2014 and 2015, I conducted an ethnographic study of San Francisco&#8217;s unhoused population. During the course of the study, I spent 57 nights sleeping out on sidewalks, parks, and beneath underpasses in San Francisco; 96 nights living among hundreds of other men in shelters; and 76 nights staying in daily or weekly hotels with people who were marginally housed.&#8221;

An in-depth look at the legal battle over clearing encampments on public property that is raging between the city and advocates for the unhoused.

He issued five expert opinions that may be distilled this way: 1) voluntary shelter in San Francisco has been systemically unavailable since COVID; 2) the city through the &#8220;Healthy Streets Operating Center,&#8221; or HSOC, clears encampments despite the lack of shelter; 3) HSOC uses police enforcement against those in encampments; 4) HSOC destroys the property of the unsheltered on a wide-spread basis; and 5) the above practices cause serious and irreparable harm.&nbsp;

He issued five expert opinions that may be distilled this way: 1) voluntary shelter in San Francisco has been systemically unavailable since COVID; 2) the city through the "Healthy Streets Operating Center," or HSOC, clears encampments despite the lack of shelter; 3) HSOC uses police enforcement against those in encampments; 4) HSOC destroys the property of the unsheltered on a wide-spread basis; and 5) the above practices cause serious and irreparable harm.&nbsp;

He issued five expert opinions that may be distilled this way: 1) voluntary shelter in San Francisco has been systemically unavailable since COVID; 2) the city through the &#8220;Healthy Streets Operating Center,&#8221; or HSOC, clears encampments despite the lack of shelter; 3) HSOC uses police enforcement against those in encampments; 4) HSOC destroys the property of the unsheltered on a wide-spread basis; and 5) the above practices cause serious and irreparable harm.&nbsp;

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Judge_Donna_M_Ryu.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-172282"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Judge Donna M. Ryu | U.S. District Court</figcaption></figure>

Judge Ryu held a hearing on Dec. 22, and the next day she ordered the preliminary injunction.

Judge Ryu held a hearing on Dec. 22, and the next day she ordered the preliminary injunction.

Against the mountain of evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, the city&#8217;s evidence was, in Ryu&#8217;s opinion, &#8220;thin&#8221; and mostly a recitation of its written policies while avoiding the plaintiff&#8217;s core argument that the city&#8217;s policies were fine—it was, she said, the city&#8217;s lack of fidelity to its policies that was the problem.

Against the mountain of evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, the city's evidence was, in Ryu's opinion, "thin" and mostly a recitation of its written policies while avoiding the plaintiff's core argument that the city's policies were fine—it was, she said, the city's lack of fidelity to its policies that was the problem.

Against the mountain of evidence submitted by the plaintiffs, the city&#8217;s evidence was, in Ryu&#8217;s opinion, &#8220;thin&#8221; and mostly a recitation of its written policies while avoiding the plaintiff&#8217;s core argument that the city&#8217;s policies were fine—it was, she said, the city&#8217;s lack of fidelity to its policies that was the problem.

Ryu found that &#8220;It is beyond dispute that homeless San Franciscans have no voluntary &#8220;option of sleeping indoors,&#8221; and as a practical matter &#8220;cannot obtain shelter.&#8221; From there she followed the existing law announced in Martin v. Boise that said the city cannot make criminal the practice of sleeping on city streets when there is no other feasible option.

Ryu found that "It is beyond dispute that homeless San Franciscans have no voluntary "option of sleeping indoors," and as a practical matter "cannot obtain shelter." From there she followed the existing law announced in Martin v. Boise that said the city cannot make criminal the practice of sleeping on city streets when there is no other feasible option.

Ryu found that &#8220;It is beyond dispute that homeless San Franciscans have no voluntary &#8220;option of sleeping indoors,&#8221; and as a practical matter &#8220;cannot obtain shelter.&#8221; From there she followed the existing law announced in Martin v. Boise that said the city cannot make criminal the practice of sleeping on city streets when there is no other feasible option.

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-the-meaning-of-the-injunction">The Meaning of the Injunction&nbsp;</h2>

<h2 id="h-the-meaning-of-the-injunction">The Meaning of the Injunction&nbsp;</h2>

The ink on Ryu&#8217;s order wasn&#8217;t dry before a fundamental question arose.

The ink on Ryu's order wasn't dry before a fundamental question arose.

The ink on Ryu&#8217;s order wasn&#8217;t dry before a fundamental question arose.

Ryu said that the sit/lie/sleep ordinances could not be enforced while there was a shortage of shelter beds. But what did that mean? If the city was clearing an encampment of 20 people and the city had 20 beds available and offered one to each of the people who were being dispossessed, was that good?

Ryu said that the sit/lie/sleep ordinances could not be enforced while there was a shortage of shelter beds. But what did that mean? If the city was clearing an encampment of 20 people and the city had 20 beds available and offered one to each of the people who were being dispossessed, was that good?

That seemed like a reasonable reading and if it was correct the city could keep clearing encampments despite the injunction, though it would have to be scrupulous to make sure that it didn&#8217;t get ahead of the beds that were actually available at that time.&nbsp;&nbsp;

That seemed like a reasonable reading and if it was correct the city could keep clearing encampments despite the injunction, though it would have to be scrupulous to make sure that it didn't get ahead of the beds that were actually available at that time.&nbsp;&nbsp;

That seemed like a reasonable reading and if it was correct the city could keep clearing encampments despite the injunction, though it would have to be scrupulous to make sure that it didn&#8217;t get ahead of the beds that were actually available at that time.&nbsp;&nbsp;

But there was another possible reading of her order, and that one had profoundly different consequences.

But there was another possible reading of her order, and that one had profoundly different consequences.

What if Ryu meant that the ordinances couldn&#8217;t be enforced unless and until there were enough beds for everyone who was unsheltered? There was no disputing that the city had a severe shortage of shelter beds. The shortage was so desperate that the city had essentially closed the shelter system to homeless individuals signing up on their own accord.

What if Ryu meant that the ordinances couldn't be enforced unless and until there were enough beds for everyone who was unsheltered? There was no disputing that the city had a severe shortage of shelter beds. The shortage was so desperate that the city had essentially closed the shelter system to homeless individuals signing up on their own accord.

What if Ryu meant that the ordinances couldn&#8217;t be enforced unless and until there were enough beds for everyone who was unsheltered? There was no disputing that the city had a severe shortage of shelter beds. The shortage was so desperate that the city had essentially closed the shelter system to homeless individuals signing up on their own accord.

The only beds available were those that freed up on a day-by-day basis from the churn as people in shelter left for housing or to return to the streets. Those beds— never a lot—were under the control of city officials and could be doled out at an encampment resolution, but they were far short of what was needed for all the city&#8217;s unsheltered.

The only beds available were those that freed up on a day-by-day basis from the churn as people in shelter left for housing or to return to the streets. Those beds— never a lot—were under the control of city officials and could be doled out at an encampment resolution, but they were far short of what was needed for all the city's unsheltered.

The only beds available were those that freed up on a day-by-day basis from the churn as people in shelter left for housing or to return to the streets. Those beds— never a lot—were under the control of city officials and could be doled out at an encampment resolution, but they were far short of what was needed for all the city&#8217;s unsheltered.

The numbers made this painfully clear. As of February 2022, the time of the last official homeless count, there were 7,754 unhoused individuals in the city of San Francisco, roughly one percent of the population. Of that number, 4,397 were &#8220;identified as sleeping in unsheltered locations.&#8221;

The numbers made this painfully clear. As of February 2022, the time of the last official homeless count, there were 7,754 unhoused individuals in the city of San Francisco, roughly one percent of the population. Of that number, 4,397 were "identified as sleeping in unsheltered locations."

The numbers made this painfully clear. As of February 2022, the time of the last official homeless count, there were 7,754 unhoused individuals in the city of San Francisco, roughly one percent of the population. Of that number, 4,397 were &#8220;identified as sleeping in unsheltered locations.&#8221;

If Judge Ryu&#8217;s order meant that all the city&#8217;s unsheltered individuals had to be sheltered before an encampment could be cleared, the city would need 4,397 more places of shelter, or at least enough to cover all those who did not reject their offer of shelter.

If Judge Ryu's order meant that all the city's unsheltered individuals had to be sheltered before an encampment could be cleared, the city would need 4,397 more places of shelter, or at least enough to cover all those who did not reject their offer of shelter.

If Judge Ryu&#8217;s order meant that all the city&#8217;s unsheltered individuals had to be sheltered before an encampment could be cleared, the city would need 4,397 more places of shelter, or at least enough to cover all those who did not reject their offer of shelter.

How much that would cost was far from clear, but the city&#8217;s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) recently reported that it would cost between $60,200 to $73,000 per year just to keep a person in a shelter bed, and that didn&#8217;t take account of the upfront capital costs of getting the bed in the first place.

How much that would cost was far from clear, but the city's Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) recently reported that it would cost between $60,200 to $73,000 per year just to keep a person in a shelter bed, and that didn't take account of the upfront capital costs of getting the bed in the first place.

How much that would cost was far from clear, but the city&#8217;s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) recently reported that it would cost between $60,200 to $73,000 per year just to keep a person in a shelter bed, and that didn&#8217;t take account of the upfront capital costs of getting the bed in the first place.

Whatever it added up to, it was a massive amount of money and if even it was theoretically doable because of the monumental tax base of San Francisco, the lived experience of city officials was that it was painful and difficult to find an appropriate site that could accommodate even 100 or 200 people, much less get a homeless facility approved over community objections. There was no way that 4,000 shelter beds were going to somehow magically appear.

Whatever it added up to, it was a massive amount of money and if even it was theoretically doable because of the monumental tax base of San Francisco, the lived experience of city officials was that it was painful and difficult to find an appropriate site that could accommodate even 100 or 200 people, much less get a homeless facility approved over community objections. There was no way that 4,000 shelter beds were going to somehow magically appear.

Mayor London Breed tours a bedroom at the 711 Post St. shelter in San Francisco Calif., on Tuesday, July 19, 2022. The building at 711 Post St. has been repurposed and is opening as a shelter for housing homeless residents, according to a news release from Mayor London Breed’s office. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img height="1667" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/INLINED2_MayorOversight02232023-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-129727"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor London Breed tours a bedroom at the 711 Post St. shelter in San Francisco on July 19, 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/INLINED2_MayorOversight02232023-2500x1667.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-129727"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Mayor London Breed tours a bedroom at the 711 Post St. shelter in San Francisco on July 19, 2022. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-two-narratives-of-homelessness">Two Narratives of Homelessness&nbsp;</h2>

<h2 id="h-two-narratives-of-homelessness">Two Narratives of Homelessness&nbsp;</h2>

There was a long and fraught history to the city&#8217;s response to homelessness. Over four decades, public discussion had been dominated by two narratives.&nbsp;&nbsp;

There was a long and fraught history to the city's response to homelessness. Over four decades, public discussion had been dominated by two narratives.&nbsp;&nbsp;

There was a long and fraught history to the city&#8217;s response to homelessness. Over four decades, public discussion had been dominated by two narratives.&nbsp;&nbsp;

One narrative was that tent encampments and the filth generated by unsheltered people congregating in small villages without sanitary services on the streets were destroying the things that made the city great. Unwashed encampment dwellers have made and would continue to make the bad personal choice to sponge off the taxpayers—who, by the way, were working hard just to feed their kids—and the only way to discourage that sponging was, well, to actually discourage it.

One narrative was that tent encampments and the filth generated by unsheltered people congregating in small villages without sanitary services on the streets were destroying the things that made the city great. Unwashed encampment dwellers have made and would continue to make the bad personal choice to sponge off the taxpayers—who, by the way, were working hard just to feed their kids—and the only way to discourage that sponging was, well, to actually discourage it.

The other narrative was that in a place with the wealth and talent of San Francisco there must be a way to compassionately engage the homeless and get them into shelter and housing so that they can access the mental health and/or addiction services so many of them need. Anything less would be an abdication of the generosity and greatness that made this city the best big city in the country. Big Ideas. Innovation. We can change the world.

The other narrative was that in a place with the wealth and talent of San Francisco there must be a way to compassionately engage the homeless and get them into shelter and housing so that they can access the mental health and/or addiction services so many of them need. Anything less would be an abdication of the generosity and greatness that made this city the best big city in the country. Big Ideas. Innovation. We can change the world.

Those two narrative threads—positions of equal dignity in the abstract—appealed to different segments of the population and like all political narratives, ebbed and surged with the passage of time and the occurrence of new events.

Those two narrative threads—positions of equal dignity in the abstract—appealed to different segments of the population and like all political narratives, ebbed and surged with the passage of time and the occurrence of new events.

And while of course it was far more complex and nuanced than labels can convey, it is nevertheless helpful to see the two narratives as a clash between the policy of enforcement—homelessness is best addressed by enacting and enforcing laws against camping on city streets—and the policy of public health that says the answer is to provide housing and social services to help those living on the streets get to a better place.

And while of course it was far more complex and nuanced than labels can convey, it is nevertheless helpful to see the two narratives as a clash between the policy of enforcement—homelessness is best addressed by enacting and enforcing laws against camping on city streets—and the policy of public health that says the answer is to provide housing and social services to help those living on the streets get to a better place.

A group of people lay on the ground of a sidewalk in the Tenderloin District of San Francisco Calif., on Monday, July 4, 2022. Homelessness and public drug use continue to be major public health issues in the neighborhood.

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img height="1666" width="2500" src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Featured_HomelessnessWiki_Neighborhoods-2500x1666.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-166844"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">People lie on the ground of a sidewalk in the Tenderloin District in San Francisco on July 4, 2022. Homelessness and public drug use continue to be major public health issues in the neighborhood. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-large"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Featured_HomelessnessWiki_Neighborhoods-2500x1666.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-166844"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">People lie on the ground of a sidewalk in the Tenderloin District in San Francisco on July 4, 2022. Homelessness and public drug use continue to be major public health issues in the neighborhood. | Benjamin Fanjoy for The Standard</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-legal-strategies-backfire">Legal Strategies Backfire&nbsp;</h2>

<h2 id="h-legal-strategies-backfire">Legal Strategies Backfire&nbsp;</h2>

Chiu was appointed by Breed on Nov. 1, 2021, to fill the remaining term of the highly regarded Dennis Herrera. Chiu brought an extraordinary background to the job. He had serious credentials: triple Harvard, law clerk for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, elected member of the city Board of Supervisors with three consecutive terms as years as board president and had served four terms in the state Assembly representing east San Francisco.

Chiu was appointed by Breed on Nov. 1, 2021, to fill the remaining term of the highly regarded Dennis Herrera. Chiu brought an extraordinary background to the job. He had serious credentials: triple Harvard, law clerk for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, elected member of the city Board of Supervisors with three consecutive terms as years as board president and had served four terms in the state Assembly representing east San Francisco.

There was also a nice irony in the fact that early in his legal career he worked as a civil rights attorney with the Lawyers&#8217; Committee for Civil Rights, the same organization representing the coalition in this case.

There was also a nice irony in the fact that early in his legal career he worked as a civil rights attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, the same organization representing the coalition in this case.

There was also a nice irony in the fact that early in his legal career he worked as a civil rights attorney with the Lawyers&#8217; Committee for Civil Rights, the same organization representing the coalition in this case.

He clearly had superlative political skills. And while that might not matter much in the ordinary hurly-burly of city litigation, in the trenches of a high-stakes public case, they could be invaluable.

He clearly had superlative political skills. And while that might not matter much in the ordinary hurly-burly of city litigation, in the trenches of a high-stakes public case, they could be invaluable.

That said, the case got off to a rocky start.

That said, the case got off to a rocky start.

After saying Ryu&#8217;s order put the city in an impossible situation, Chiu&#8217;s press release of Jan. 3 said he&#8217;d be filing a motion to &#8220;clarify&#8221; the order.

After saying Ryu's order put the city in an impossible situation, Chiu's press release of Jan. 3 said he'd be filing a motion to "clarify" the order.

After saying Ryu&#8217;s order put the city in an impossible situation, Chiu&#8217;s press release of Jan. 3 said he&#8217;d be filing a motion to &#8220;clarify&#8221; the order.

The primary reason to issue such a statement is the hope that it will sway public sentiment and that will nudge the judge to do the right thing.&nbsp; But judges, particularly federal judges, can be prickly about being nudged that way.

The primary reason to issue such a statement is the hope that it will sway public sentiment and that will nudge the judge to do the right thing.&nbsp; But judges, particularly federal judges, can be prickly about being nudged that way.

Moreover, a lawyer has to be careful when he or she asks a judge to &#8220;clarify&#8221; an order, particularly when the clarification is a matter of such importance as it was here. Seeking &#8220;clarification&#8221; on a weighty issue could seem disingenuous.

Moreover, a lawyer has to be careful when he or she asks a judge to "clarify" an order, particularly when the clarification is a matter of such importance as it was here. Seeking "clarification" on a weighty issue could seem disingenuous.

Moreover, a lawyer has to be careful when he or she asks a judge to &#8220;clarify&#8221; an order, particularly when the clarification is a matter of such importance as it was here. Seeking &#8220;clarification&#8221; on a weighty issue could seem disingenuous.

On Jan. 3, Chiu&#8217;s lawyers filed an &#8220;administrative motion,&#8221; one of those housekeeping filings that lawyers use to get permission to file a brief that exceeds the allowed page count. They got smacked down.

On Jan. 3, Chiu's lawyers filed an "administrative motion," one of those housekeeping filings that lawyers use to get permission to file a brief that exceeds the allowed page count. They got smacked down.

On Jan. 3, Chiu&#8217;s lawyers filed an &#8220;administrative motion,&#8221; one of those housekeeping filings that lawyers use to get permission to file a brief that exceeds the allowed page count. They got smacked down.

The judge told them that wasn&#8217;t the way to proceed. &#8220;You know better,&#8221; she said.

The judge told them that wasn't the way to proceed. "You know better," she said.

The judge told them that wasn&#8217;t the way to proceed. &#8220;You know better,&#8221; she said.

City Attorney David Chiu attends and speaks at a press conference in San Francisco City Hall of on Aug. 4, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img src="https://content.sfstandard.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/LagunaHondaPresser-109.jpg" alt="" class="wp-image-65966"/><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">City Attorney David Chiu speaks at a press conference at San Francisco City Hall on Aug. 4, 2022. | Camille Cohen/The Standard</figcaption></figure>

She denied the motion and told the city lawyers that if they wanted her to consider their argument they should come back in the proper fashion. (The city wasn&#8217;t alone on this; the Coalition tried the same approach on one of its issues and got the same response.)

She denied the motion and told the city lawyers that if they wanted her to consider their argument they should come back in the proper fashion. (The city wasn't alone on this; the Coalition tried the same approach on one of its issues and got the same response.)

She denied the motion and told the city lawyers that if they wanted her to consider their argument they should come back in the proper fashion. (The city wasn&#8217;t alone on this; the Coalition tried the same approach on one of its issues and got the same response.)

Meanwhile, the injunction stayed in place.

Meanwhile, the injunction stayed in place.

But a funny thing had happened. Now it was as if the interpretation that Chiu worried about—the one that put the city in the impossible situation—was what the order actually said. Ryu didn&#8217;t say that—and it might even have been the less likely of the interpretations a fair reader would have given the words she wrote—but by asking for the clarification and not getting it, Chiu—or at least his office—had given dignity to that interpretation.

But a funny thing had happened. Now it was as if the interpretation that Chiu worried about—the one that put the city in the impossible situation—was what the order actually said. Ryu didn't say that—and it might even have been the less likely of the interpretations a fair reader would have given the words she wrote—but by asking for the clarification and not getting it, Chiu—or at least his office—had given dignity to that interpretation.

But a funny thing had happened. Now it was as if the interpretation that Chiu worried about—the one that put the city in the impossible situation—was what the order actually said. Ryu didn&#8217;t say that—and it might even have been the less likely of the interpretations a fair reader would have given the words she wrote—but by asking for the clarification and not getting it, Chiu—or at least his office—had given dignity to that interpretation.

Despite her invitation, the city did not go back to Judge Ryu with a motion to determine or limit the scope of her injunction. Instead, city lawyers filed an appeal to the 9th Circuit.

Despite her invitation, the city did not go back to Judge Ryu with a motion to determine or limit the scope of her injunction. Instead, city lawyers filed an appeal to the 9th Circuit.

There was nothing wrong with appealing, that was expected. But now armed with a pending appeal, Chiu&#8217;s team returned to Judge Ryu and asked her to suspend her injunction while the appeal was pending. To support that request, they repeated the argument about the impossible position the city was in and how it was not feasible to leave all encampments in place until the city somehow produced 4,000 shelter beds.

There was nothing wrong with appealing, that was expected. But now armed with a pending appeal, Chiu's team returned to Judge Ryu and asked her to suspend her injunction while the appeal was pending. To support that request, they repeated the argument about the impossible position the city was in and how it was not feasible to leave all encampments in place until the city somehow produced 4,000 shelter beds.

There was nothing wrong with appealing, that was expected. But now armed with a pending appeal, Chiu&#8217;s team returned to Judge Ryu and asked her to suspend her injunction while the appeal was pending. To support that request, they repeated the argument about the impossible position the city was in and how it was not feasible to leave all encampments in place until the city somehow produced 4,000 shelter beds.

Ryu denied the request. The city might well have lost anyway, but the city lawyers&#8217; approach clearly bothered Ryu.

Ryu denied the request. The city might well have lost anyway, but the city lawyers' approach clearly bothered Ryu.

Ryu denied the request. The city might well have lost anyway, but the city lawyers&#8217; approach clearly bothered Ryu.

She emphasized that even though she had invited the city to raise the issue properly, it had declined to do so. In her view, the city&#8217;s legal gambit deprived her of an opportunity to consider the city&#8217;s argument in the context of a proper factual record—witnesses, testimony, evidence—the way important issues should be decided in a court of law.

She emphasized that even though she had invited the city to raise the issue properly, it had declined to do so. In her view, the city's legal gambit deprived her of an opportunity to consider the city's argument in the context of a proper factual record—witnesses, testimony, evidence—the way important issues should be decided in a court of law.

She emphasized that even though she had invited the city to raise the issue properly, it had declined to do so. In her view, the city&#8217;s legal gambit deprived her of an opportunity to consider the city&#8217;s argument in the context of a proper factual record—witnesses, testimony, evidence—the way important issues should be decided in a court of law.

So, the injunction remained in place.

In an interview, Chiu acknowledged that the beginning of the case was challenging.

In an interview, Chiu acknowledged that the beginning of the case was challenging.

He said the plaintiffs have a large legal team, and &#8220;we have had to staff up overnight.&#8221;

He said the plaintiffs have a large legal team, and "we have had to staff up overnight."

He said the plaintiffs have a large legal team, and &#8220;we have had to staff up overnight.&#8221;

However, he emphasized that the office has committed eight attorneys to the case, in addition to himself. &#8220;That number of attorneys is equivalent to the size of any of our teams that are advising major departments in the city,&#8221; he said.

However, he emphasized that the office has committed eight attorneys to the case, in addition to himself. "That number of attorneys is equivalent to the size of any of our teams that are advising major departments in the city," he said.

However, he emphasized that the office has committed eight attorneys to the case, in addition to himself. &#8220;That number of attorneys is equivalent to the size of any of our teams that are advising major departments in the city,&#8221; he said.

Is San Francisco’s best strategy in homelessness lawsuit to lose?

‘Somebody is going to get hurt’: Target security guard speaks out about San Francisco retail crime

Honey Mahogany’s supporters see her as the harbinger of a new kind of San Francisco politics

Revolution from the inside out: Young activists work to heal themselves and overhaul the justice system

Meet the ‘orange people’ who are helping visitors and buffing SF’s battered image

Search Results for: drug crisis

Is San Francisco’s best strategy in homelessness lawsuit to lose?

‘Somebody is going to get hurt’: Target security guard speaks out about San Francisco retail crime

Honey Mahogany’s supporters see her as the harbinger of a new kind of San Francisco politics

Revolution from the inside out: Young activists work to heal themselves and overhaul the justice system

Meet the ‘orange people’ who are helping visitors and buffing SF’s battered image