Title 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS SEC. 43.15.25. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION.›Chapter 118 — PLACE FOR ALL PROGRAM
SEC. 118.2. FINDINGS.
San Francisco Administrative Code · 2025 edition · updated 2026-07-25 · San Francisco
(a) San Francisco has struggled with homelessness for at least four decades. Since the 1980’s, successive mayoral administrations have implemented different and sometimes divergent strategies to address the City’s most enduring crisis.
(1) In 1982, Mayor Dianne Feinstein launched a network of faith-based emergency winter shelters and soup kitchens.
(2) In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Mayor Art Agnos took a different approach, unveiling the “Beyond Shelter” plan to provide unhoused people access to supportive services and a pathway to long-term housing. In 1990, Mayor Agnos opened the City’s first two Multi-Service Centers, which were homeless shelters with onsite mental health and substance use disorder services.
(3) In 1993, Mayor Frank Jordan instituted the Matrix Program, which tasked police officers accompanied by social workers or health aides with clearing unhoused people from City streets and connecting them to services. In the first six months of the program, police issued over 6,000 citations for quality-of-life misdemeanors, such as public inebriation or sleeping in doorways. In 1992, voters approved Mayor Jordan’s Proposition J, which banned aggressive panhandling. Voters also approved Mayor Jordan’s 1994 ballot measure, also named Proposition J, which banned loitering within 30 feet of an automated teller machine for more than one minute.
(4) After his election in 1995, Mayor Willie Brown declared homelessness unsolvable at a local level, and insisted any measurable improvement would require state and federal dollars to fund the housing and services needed to keep people off the streets. During his two terms in office, Mayor Brown’s administration nonetheless added thousands of units of affordable and subsidized housing, including leasing and renovating single room occupancy hotels for low-income and unhoused people.
(5) Prior to his election as Mayor in 2003, as a member of the Board of Supervisors, Gavin Newsom authored a 2002 ballot measure, entitled “Care Not Cash,” which reduced City-funded General Assistance cash payments to unhoused people, and redirected the savings to fund services and
supportive housing. According to a 2008 City Controller’s audit, the Care Not Cash program housed 2,127 people between its implementation in 2003 and December 2007. The Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing (“HSH”) estimates that Care Not Cash led to the creation of 1,300 units of permanent supportive housing.
In 2004, Mayor Newsom introduced his “Ten Year Plan to Abolish Chronic Homelessness,” which proposed to create 3,000 units of permanent supportive housing by 2010, and to replace shelters with 24-hour crisis clinics and sobering centers. By 2014, the City was still 300 units shy of the 3,000 pledged units, and had reduced the number of shelter beds by a third, from 1,910 beds in 2004 to 1,145 beds in 2014.
Mayor Newsom introduced his “Ten Year Plan to Abolish Chronic Homelessness,” which proposed to create 3,000 units of permanent supportive housing by 2010, and to replace shelters with 24-hour crisis clinics and sobering centers. By 2014, the City was still 300 units shy of the 3,000 pledged units, and had reduced the number of shelter beds by a third, from 1,910 beds in 2004 to 1,145 beds in 2014.
Mayor Newsom authored two additional voter-approved ballot measures aimed at responding to homelessness: Proposition M in 2003, which amended the City’s panhandling and loitering bans, and Proposition L in 2010, which made it illegal to sit or lie on sidewalks citywide from 7am to 11pm.
(6) Mayor Ed Lee oversaw the opening of the City’s first Navigation Center in 2015, and in 2016 sponsored legislation creating HSH, pledging to spend at least $1 billion over the next four years to address homelessness. Mayor Lee directed implementation of the City’s Coordinated Entry system, seeking to improve the coordination of services by consolidating the dozens of City-funded homeless service groups into one system with a shared database. In 2017, shortly before his death, Mayor Lee pledged to move 1,000 unhoused people off the streets, and open two more Navigation Centers.
(b) Now, four decades after Mayor Feinstein first attempted to respond to rising homelessness in San Francisco, the issue continues to vex the City. According to the Homeless Point-in-Time Count conducted on January 24, 2019, more than 8,035 people were experiencing homelessness at that time, a 17% increase from 2017. Among those surveyed, 5,180 were unsheltered, with 86% of unsheltered individuals sleeping outdoors in streets, parks, or tents. According to a database of homeless individuals who use health care and other services, the number of people experiencing homelessness over the course of a year is estimated to be much higher than the number of people who experience homelessness on a given night, with estimates that more than 17,500 people experience homelessness in San Francisco during a given year.
(c) During those same four decades, San Francisco has earned a national and international reputation for the severity of its homelessness crisis, with widespread reports of the City’s street conditions appearing in media outlets around the world. In January 2017, Leilani Farha, a United Nations Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, issued a report finding that San Francisco’s response to its unhoused population constitutes cruel and inhumane treatment, and is a violation of international human rights law including laws establishing the rights to life, housing, health, and water and sanitation. Her report further stated “[T]he scope and severity of the living conditions in informal settlements make them one of the most pervasive violations of the human rights of dignity, security, health and life worldwide.”
stitutes cruel and inhumane treatment, and is a violation of international human rights law including laws establishing the rights to life, housing, health, and water and sanitation. Her report further stated “[T]he scope and severity of the living conditions in informal settlements make them one of the most pervasive violations of the human rights of dignity, security, health and life worldwide.”
(d) San Francisco voters expressed their own dissatisfaction with the current state of homelessness in a Dignity Health CityBeat Poll conducted in May 2021. Eighty percent of San Francisco voters identified addressing homelessness and street conditions as a high priority for the City, and 88% stated that homelessness and street behavior had gotten worse in the past few years.
(e) The COVID-19 pandemic and the City’s Shelter in Place response exacerbated street conditions and contributed to an increase in the number of tent encampments citywide, with large numbers of unhoused people seeking shelter in neighborhoods throughout the City. This was at least partly due to a 75% reduction in available shelter beds, and a halt on new admissions to the shelter system in the early days of the pandemic, in compliance with guidance from the Centers for Disease Control requiring social distancing in the City’s homeless shelters, thus necessitating a decrease in shelter capacity.
(f) Although encampments increased across the City during Shelter in Place, the increase and related impacts were felt more severely in neighborhoods where homelessness was most acute prior to COVID-19. In the Tenderloin, the number of tents increased 285% between January and May 2020.
(g) On May 4, 2020, UC Hastings Law School filed a lawsuit on behalf of a group of Tenderloin residents and business owners over conditions in the neighborhood. As part of a settlement, the City agreed to achieve a 70% reduction in the number of tents by July 20, 2020. By July 3, 2020, the number of tents in the Tenderloin had decreased by 65%. By July 10, 2020, the City had reduced the number of tents in the Tenderloin by over 73%. As of August 18, 2020, the City had moved 87% of tents from the Tenderloin, and placed more than 600 people into Shelter in Place (SIP) hotels or other shelter.
(h) Following the issuance of new guidance from the Department of Public Health (“DPH”) regarding street encampments, the City’s Healthy Streets Operations Center resumed resolving encampments in other neighborhoods as well, subject to the availability of alternative placements.
(i) Notwithstanding such efforts, conditions on our streets remain unacceptable. While some progress has been made in parts of the City, many thousands of people continue to sleep in unregulated, unsafe encampments without access to basic services such as water, food, sanitation, or bathrooms.
(j) As demonstrated by the summary of mayoral initiatives above, the reality that thousands of individuals remain without homes or shelter is not for lack of effort or investment in solutions by the City. Since 2004, San Francisco has helped over 26,000 individuals exit from homelessness. Today, the City has more than 9,000 units of permanent supportive housing which house over 10,000 formerly homeless individuals every night who would otherwise be homeless. The City’s efforts to resolve homelessness have proved successful for many individuals. But for many others, and for the City as a whole, the homelessness problem persists and, in some respects, has worsened.
(k) Since 2015, the City’s development of the Navigation Center model has represented a significant expansion of shorter-term shelter as well. Navigation Centers are unlike traditional emergency shelters because they are service-intensive and low-barrier, and provide case management, meals, showers, laundry, and 24-hour access, and allow guests to bring their partners, pets, and belongings.
(l) Since 2015, HSH has opened ten Navigation Centers, eight of which are currently operating. According to HSH, from the launch of Navigation Centers in 2015 through the end of 2019, 48% of Navigation Center exits were either to permanent housing or reunifications with family or friends through the Homeward Bound program. Over 5,000 clients have been served at Navigation Centers from 2015 to December 2019.
(m) In October 2018, Mayor London Breed announced a commitment to open at least 1,000 additional shelter beds, including Navigation Center beds, by the end of 2020. Prior to the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, the City was close to meeting this goal, and opened 880 of the proposed 1,000 beds by March 2021.
(n) In November 2018, the voters approved Proposition C (“Prop C”), creating a new gross receipts tax on high-grossing companies estimated to generate over $300 million annually for homeless housing and services. In June 2020, a state appeals court upheld a lower court decision validating Prop C, and on September 9, 2020, the California Supreme Court denied further legal review, freeing up nearly $500 million in revenue that had been collected but remained unspent pending resolution of the litigation.
(o) During Shelter in Place, the City acquired over 2,441 SIP hotel rooms to provide shelter to homeless individuals determined to be medically vulnerable to COVID-19. The cost of providing a hotel room is approximately $260 per person per night, although the City anticipates that 100% of eligible sheltering costs for hotel residents who meet eligibility criteria set by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) may be reimbursed by FEMA.
ver 2,441 SIP hotel rooms to provide shelter to homeless individuals determined to be medically vulnerable to COVID-19. The cost of providing a hotel room is approximately $260 per person per night, although the City anticipates that 100% of eligible sheltering costs for hotel residents who meet eligibility criteria set by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) may be reimbursed by FEMA.
(p) On September 29, 2020, the Board of Supervisors enacted the Fiscal Year 2020-21 budget, which included funding for the acquisition or leasing of an additional 1,500 permanent supportive housing units through Fiscal Year 2022-23, largely funded through Prop C revenue. These units, proposed in Mayor Breed’s Homelessness Recovery Plan, represent the largest one-time expansion of permanent supportive housing in San Francisco in 20 years. The budget for HSH increased from $367,690,818, in Fiscal Year 2019-20, to $852,100,000, for Fiscal Year 2020-21, and $667,800,000 for Fiscal Year 2021-22, with the bulk of the increase paying for Shelter in Place hotel rooms and new permanent supportive housing units.
(q) San Franciscans are justifiably frustrated that after multiple decades and many billions of dollars of investment in additional shelter bed capacity, hotel placements, and permanent supportive housing units, thousands of unsheltered people continue to sleep on the streets night after night, and that the City relies on residential neighborhoods to serve as campsites of last resort for unhoused people, including individuals struggling with significant behavioral health conditions and substance use disorders.
(r) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case entitled Martin v. City of Boise, 902 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2018), held that the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment bars a city from criminally prosecuting people for sleeping on public property when those persons have committed no offenses other than sleeping on public property, and the city has not offered alternative shelter. The Boise case provides a further impetus – though none is needed – for San Francisco to provide more shelter options for unhoused people in our midst.
(s) Notwithstanding the many investments described above, San Francisco has never established a comprehensive citywide strategy for meeting the shelter needs of the unhoused. Additional shelters, safe sleep sites, Safe Overnight Parking Lots, and non-congregate cabins offer a potential multipronged strategy for addressing the needs of thousands of people who continue to suffer outside every night.
(t) According to the Bay Area Council’s June 2021 report entitled “Bay Area Homelessness: New Urgency, New Solutions,” most Bay Area governments have defunded shelter and interim housing to increase permanent housing production, while remaining “unable to scale permanent housing faster than the rate at which residents are becoming homeless.”
(u) San Francisco’s failure to provide adequate shelter for our unhoused population is reflected in the fact that the 2019 Point in Time Count found 8,035 total people experiencing homelessness, 2,855 of whom were unsheltered. As a point of comparison, Boston’s 2019 Point in Time Count found 6,203 total people experiencing homelessness, only 121 of whom were unsheltered.
(v) A February 2021 report by All Home entitled “A Call to Action from the Regional Impact Council” calls for Bay Area governments to balance homelessness spending using a 1-2-4 framework, under which every $1 invested in shelter or interim housing should be matched with $2 invested in permanent housing and $4 invested in homelessness prevention. As of January 2022, the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing estimates that to align with the 1-2-4 framework, San Francisco would need at least 2,000 additional shelter beds.
(w) During the COVID-19 pandemic state of emergency, the City acted quickly to establish thousands of temporary non-congregate shelter placements, including Shelter in Place Hotels, safe sleep sites, and a non-congregate cabin village.
(x) San Francisco is in urgent need of additional non-congregate shelter options for our unhoused residents, including non-congregate cabins, Safe Overnight Parking Lots, and a limited number of safe sleep sites. This is both a humanitarian need, to help unhoused residents sleeping on our streets and in our public spaces every night, and a quality of life need, to relieve housed residents who endure the daily quality of life disruptions that result from open-air drug use, psychosis, and other behavioral health issues exacerbated by unsheltered homelessness.
(Added by Ord. 92-22, File No. 220281, App. 6/24/2022, Eff. 7/25/2022)
Get a plain-English answer with a citation back to this text.
Ask AI about this code▸ Contents — San Francisco Administrative Code
- Chapter 1 — GENERAL PROVISIONS
- Chapter 2 — BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
- Chapter 2A — EXECUTIVE BRANCH
- Chapter 2B
- Chapter 3 — BUDGET PROCEDURES
- Chapter 4 — CITY BUILDINGS E UIPMENT AND VEHICLES , Q,
- Chapter 5 — COMMITTEES
- Chapter 6 — PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
- Chapter 7 — DISASTER COUNCIL
- Chapter 8 — DOCUMENTS RECORDS AND PUBLICATIONS ,
- Chapter 9A — FARMERS' MARKET
- Chapter 9B — FLEA MARKET
- Chapter 10 — FINANCE TAXATION AND OTHER FISCAL MATTERS ,,
- Chapter 10A — [REQUEST FOR SHERIFF’S SERVICES]
- Chapter 10B — SPECIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES
- Chapter 10C — REIMBURSEMENT FOR TOWING AND STORAGE OF VEHICLES
- Chapter 10D — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 10E: PLANNING MONITORING
- Chapter 10F
- Chapter 10G
- Chapter 10H — RECOVERY OF COSTS OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE
- Chapter 11 — FRANCHISES
- Chapter 12 — HOUSING AUTHORITY
- Chapter 12A
- Chapter 12B — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12C — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12D — MINORITY/WOMEN/LOCAL BUSINESS UTILIZATION
- Chapter 12E — BAN ON CITY USE OF GAS-POWERED LANDSCAPING EQUIP…
- Chapter 12F — IMPLEMENTING THE MACBRIDE PRINCIPLES – NORTHERN …
- Chapter 12G — PROHIBITION ON USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS FOR POLITICAL…
- Chapter 12H — IMMIGRATION STATUS
- Chapter 12I — CIVIL IMMIGRATION DETAINERS
- Chapter 12J — CITY BUSINESS WITH BURMA PROHIBITED
- Chapter 12K — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12L
- Chapter 12M
- Chapter 12N — LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER, QUEER, AND …
- Chapter 12O — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12P — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12Q — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12R — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12S — WORKING FAMILIES CREDIT PROGRAM
- Chapter 12T — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12U
- Chapter 12V — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 12W — [REDESIGNATED] 1
- Chapter 12X — [REPEALED]
- Chapter 12Y
- Chapter 12Z — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 13 — JAILS AND PRISONERS
- Chapter 14 — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 14A — DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM
- Chapter 14B — LOCAL BUSINESS ENTERPRISE UTILIZATION AND NON-DI…
- Chapter 14C — [EXPIRED]
- Chapter 15 — MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE
- Chapter 16 — OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES GENERALLY
- Chapter 17 — PUBLIC OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES
- Chapter 18 — PAYROLL PROCEDURE
- Chapter 19 — PUBLIC SAFETY CAMERA ORDINANCE
- Chapter 19A — PUBLIC HEALTH
- Chapter 19B — ACQUISITION OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
- Chapter 20 — SOCIAL SERVICES
- Chapter 21 — ACQUISITION OF COMMODITIES AND SERVICES
- Chapter 21A — HEALTH-RELATED COMMODITIES AND SERVICES
- Chapter 21B — CORE INITIATIVES ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS, DRUG O…
- Chapter 21C — [REDESIGNATED]
- Chapter 21D — FOOD PURCHASES AT HOSPITALS OPERATED BY THE DEPA…
- Chapter 21E — GOODS OR SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR INCARCERATED PER…
- Chapter 21F — SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION SOCIAL…
- Chapter 21G
- Chapter 21H — PROCUREMENT OF FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION
- Chapter 22 — RADIO COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
- Chapter 22A — INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
- Chapter 22B — TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
- Chapter 22C — PUBLIC INTERNET ACCESS
- Chapter 22D — OPEN DATA POLICY
- Chapter 22E — CITY-OWNED FIBER-OPTIC FACILITIES
- Chapter 22G — OFFICE OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGY
- Chapter 22H — DESIGNATION UNDER HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY A…
- Chapter 22I — OFFICE OF CYBER SECURITY AND DUTIES OF THE CHIEF…
- Chapter 22J — ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS
- Chapter 23 — REAL PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS
- Chapter 23A — SURPLUS PUBLIC LANDS ORDINANCE
- Chapter 24 — REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
- Chapter 24A — ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE LOCAL RENT SUPPLEMENT P…
- Chapter 24B — RELOCATION APPEALS BOARD
- Chapter 25 — STREET LIGHTING
- Chapter 26 — [RESERVED]
- Chapter 27 — HEALTHY NAIL SALON RECOGNITION PROGRAM
- Chapter 28 — ADMINISTRATIVE DEBARMENT PROCEDURE
- Chapter 29 — FINDINGS OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND FEASIBILITY
- Chapter 29A — APPROVAL OF POWER PLANT PLANNING CODE SEC. 303 C…
- Chapter 29B — CHILD CARE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR CITY AND CITY-F…
- Chapter 30 — CENTRALIZATION OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
- Chapter 31 — CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PROCEDURES A…
- Chapter 32 — RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM
- Chapter 33 — COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN
- Chapter 33A — LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVE…
- Chapter 34 — NOTIFICATION TO ASSESSOR CONCERNING ZONING RECLAS…
- Chapter 35 — RESIDENTIAL HOTEL AND PDR COMPATIBILITY AND PROTE…
- Chapter 36 — COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS AREA PLANS AND PROGRAMS
- Chapter 37 — RESIDENTIAL RENT STABILIZATION AND ARBITRATION OR…
- Chapter 37A — RENT STABILIZATION AND ARBITRATION FEE
- Chapter 37B — MIDTOWN PARK APARTMENTS
- Chapter 37C — [EXPIRED]
- Chapter 38 — COMMERCIAL LANDLORDS; ACCESS IMPROVEMENT OBLIGATI…
- Chapter 39 — [RIGHT TO RETURN TO REVITALIZED PUBLIC HOUSING]
- Chapter 40 — HOUSING CODE ENFORCEMENT LOAN PROGRAM
- Chapter 41 — RESIDENTIAL HOTEL UNIT CONVERSION AND DEMOLITION
- Chapter 41A — RESIDENTIAL UNIT CONVERSION AND DEMOLITION
- Chapter 41B — COMMUNITY OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE ACT
- Chapter 41C — TIME-SHARE CONVERSION ORDINANCE
- Chapter 41D — RESIDENTIAL HOTEL VISITOR POLICIES
- Chapter 41E — RESIDENTIAL HOTEL MAIL RECEPTACLE ORDINANCE
- Chapter 41F
- Chapter 41G — RESIDENTIAL HOTEL COVID-19 PROTECTIONS
- Chapter 41H — [EXPIRED]
- Chapter 42 — INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
- Chapter 43 — MUNICIPAL FINANCE LAW
- Title 1 — GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS SEC. 43.1.1. TITLE.
- Title 2 — FINANCING RESIDENCES SEC. 43.1.7. LOANS FOR RESIDENC…
- Title 3 — BONDS
- Title 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS
- Title 1 — GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS SEC. 43.2.1. TITLE.
- Title 2 — FINANCING FACILITIES
- Title 3 — BONDS SEC. 43.2.17. ISSUANCE OF BONDS.
- Title 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS SEC. 43.2.27. LIBERAL CONSTR…
- Title 1 — GENERAL PROVISIONS SEC. 43.10.1. TITLE.
- Title 2 — PROVISIONS RELATING TO FORMATION OF DISTRICTS SEC. 4…
- Title 3 — PROVISIONS RELATING TO BONDS SEC. 43.10.18. ALTERNAT…
- Title 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS SEC. 43.10.22. LIBERAL CONST…
- Title 5 — CHANGE PROCEEDINGS SEC. 43.10.26. ALTERNATE PROCEDUR…
- Title 1 — GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS SEC. 43.15.1. TIT…
- Title 2 — RESIDENCES SEC. 43.15.6. LOANS TO QUALIFIED 501(c)(3…
- Title 3 — BONDS SEC. 43.15.15. ISSUANCE OF BONDS; LOANS TO QUA…
-
▸ Title 4 — SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS SEC. 43.15.25. LIBERAL CONST…
Overview- Chapter 44 — ADULT DAY HEALTH CARE PLANNING COUNCIL
- Chapter 45 — JURY FEES
- Chapter 46 — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 47: PREFERENCE IN CITY AFFORDA…
- Chapter 48 — RENTAL SUBSIDY PROGRAM FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES
- Chapter 49 — SECURITY DEPOSITS FOR RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTY
- Chapter 49A — RESIDENTIAL TENANT COMMUNICATIONS
- Chapter 49B — RESIDENTIAL RENTAL UNITS: LOCK REPLACEMENTS BY L…
- Chapter 50 — NONPROFIT PERFORMING ARTS LOAN PROGRAM
- Chapter 51 — VOLUNTARY ARTS CONTRIBUTIONS PROGRAM
- Chapter 52 — SAN FRANCISCO CARBON MITIGATION PROGRAM
- Chapter 53 — URBAN AGRICULTURE
- Chapter 53A — URBAN AGRICULTURE INCENTIVE ZONES ACT PROCEDURES
- Chapter 54 — SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY FACILITY COMMISSION
- Chapter 55 — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 56: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS
- Chapter 57 — FILM COMMISSION
- Chapter 58 — RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN CIVIL MATTERS
- Chapter 58A — RIGHT TO CIVIL COUNSEL FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC V…
- Chapter 59
- Chapter 59A — FOOD SECURITY AND EQUITY REPORTS
- Chapter 60 — ASSISTED HOUSING PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
- Chapter 61 — WATERFRONT LAND USE
- Chapter 62
- Chapter 63
- Chapter 64 — CITY EMPLOYEE AND CITY CONTRACTOR SAFETY AND HEALTH
- Chapter 65 — RENT REDUCTION AND RELOCATION PLAN FOR TENANTS
- Chapter 65A — COMPENSATION, OR SUBSTITUTE HOUSING SERVICE, FOR…
- Chapter 66 — SEISMIC SAFETY RETROFIT PROGRAM
- Chapter 66A — [RESERVED]
- Chapter 67 — THE SAN FRANCISCO SUNSHINE ORDINANCE OF 1999
- Chapter 67A — CELL PHONES, PAGERS AND SIMILAR SOUND-PRODUCING …
- Chapter 67B — PARENTAL LEAVE AND TELECONFERENCING
- Chapter 68 — CULTURAL EQUITY ENDOWMENT FUND
- Chapter 69 — SAN FRANCISCO HEALTH AUTHORITY
- Chapter 70 — IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES PUBLIC AUTHORITY
- Chapter 71 — MILLS ACT CONTRACT PROCEDURES
- Chapter 72 — RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR LEAD HAZARD REMEDIATION
- Chapter 73 — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 74: RENT ESCROW ACCOUNT PROGRAM
- Chapter 75 — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 76: [RESERVED] CHAPTER 77: BUI…
- Chapter 78 — DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION PERMIT TRACKING…
- Chapter 79 — PREAPPROVAL NOTICE FOR CERTAIN CITY PROJECTS
- Chapter 79A — ADDITIONAL PREAPPROVAL NOTICE FOR CERTAIN CITY P…
- Chapter 80 — ANTI-BLIGHT ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE
- Chapter 81 — [RESERVED] CHAPTER 80A: ORDERS TO VACATE DUE TO H…
- Chapter 82 — LOCAL HIRING POLICY FOR CONSTRUCTION
- Chapter 83 — FIRST SOURCE HIRING PROGRAM
- Chapter 84 — SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM…
- Chapter 85 — THE HOUSING INNOVATION PROGRAM
- Chapter 86 — CHILDREN AND FAMILIES FIRST COMMISSION
- Chapter 87 — FAIR HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE
- Chapter 88 — PERFORMANCE AND REVIEW ORDINANCE OF 1999
- Chapter 89 — DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES
- Chapter 90 — ENTERTAINMENT COMMISSION
- Chapter 90A — PROMOTING AND SUSTAINING MUSIC AND CULTURE
- Chapter 91 — LANGUAGE ACCESS
- Chapter 92 — REAL ESTATE LOAN COUNSELING AND EDUCATION
- Chapter 93 — PREGNANCY INFORMATION DISCLOSURE AND PROTECTION O…
- Chapter 93A — SAN FRANCISCO REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS POLICY
- Chapter 94 — THE SAN FRANCISCO PLAZA PROGRAM
- Chapter 94A — THE SAN FRANCISCO SHARED SPACES PROGRAM
- Chapter 94B — ENTERTAINMENT ZONES
- Chapter 94D — GREATER DOWNTOWN COMMUNITY BENEFIT DISTRICT MAST…
- Chapter 95 — IDENTIFICATION CARDS
- Chapter 96 — COORDINATION BETWEEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND TH…
- Chapter 96A — LAW ENFORCEMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
- Chapter 96B — POLICY MAKING MARIJUANA OFFENSES THE LOWEST LAW …
- Chapter 96C — POLICE INTERROGATION OF YOUTH - JEFF ADACHI YOUT…
- Chapter 96D — PRESENTATION OF YOUTH CASES
- Chapter 96E — [DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DATA REPORTING]
- Chapter 96F — COMMUNITY POLICING PLANS
- Chapter 96G — LIMITS ON POLICE DEPARTMENT USE AND STORAGE OF D…
- Chapter 96H — LAW ENFORCEMENT EQUIPMENT POLICIES
- Chapter 96I — POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
- Chapter 96J — PROTECTING ACCESS TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE FA…
- Chapter 97 — HEALTHCARE IMPACT REPORTS
- Chapter 98 — THE BETTER STREETS POLICY
- Chapter 99 — PUBLIC POWER IN NEW CITY DEVELOPMENTS
- Chapter 100 — PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE IMPOSITION OF ADMINISTR…
- Chapter 101 — RESTRICTING THE PURCHASE, SALE, OR DISTRIBUTION …
- Chapter 102 — OUR CHILDREN OUR FAMILIES COUNCIL ,
- Chapter 103 — NON-COOPERATION WITH IDENTITY-BASED REGISTRY ORD…
- Chapter 104 — COLLECTION OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDEN…
- Chapter 105 — CIGARETTE LITTER ABATEMENT FEE ORDINANCE
- Chapter 106 — CITY NAVIGATION CENTERS
- Chapter 107 — CULTURAL DISTRICTS
- Chapter 107A — AFRICAN AMERICAN ARTS AND CULTURAL DISTRICT
- Chapter 107B — CASTRO LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER, AND…
- Chapter 107C — AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL DISTRICT
- Chapter 107D — SUNSET CHINESE CULTURAL DISTRICT
- Chapter 109 — PRIORITIZING 100% AFFORDABLE HOUSING
- Chapter 110 — FORGIVABLE LOAN FOR FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYERS
- Chapter 111 — HOUSING REPORTS FOR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH DISA…
- Chapter 115 — AUTOMATED POINT OF SALE STATION REGISTRATION AND…
- Chapter 116
- Chapter 117 — COOPERATIVE LIVING OPPORTUNITIES FOR MENTAL HEAL…
-
▸ Chapter 118 — PLACE FOR ALL PROGRAM
Overview- SEC. 118.1. TITLE.
- SEC. 118.2. FINDINGS.
- SEC. 118.3. DEFINITIONS.
- SEC. 118.4. SHELTER POLICY.
- SEC. 118.5. IMPLEMENTATION OF TELEPHONIC SHELTER REGISTRATION …
- SEC. 118.6. PLACE FOR ALL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, SURVEY OF REAL …
- SEC. 118.7. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PLACE FOR ALL PROGRAM.
- SEC. 118.8. ANNUAL ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF UNSHELTERED PEOPLE.
- SEC. 118.9. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION.
- SEC. 118.10. UNDERTAKING FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE.
- Chapter 119 — SAFE PARKING PROGRAMS
- Chapter 120 — ADMINISTRATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDS
- Chapter 121 — CLOSURE OF JUVENILE HALL
- Chapter 122 — CLOSURE OF COUNTY JAIL 4
- Chapter 123 — LIBRARY LAUREATE PROGRAMS
- Chapter 123A — LIBRARY READ TO RECOVERY PROGRAM
- Chapter 124 — EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF SHELTER, TRANSITIONAL …