Spanish (ES)
Gavin Newsom is pushing California cities to more aggressively clear homeless encampments in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling freeing cities from restrictions on doing so.
-
How this started:
-
In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Grants Pass v. Johnson case.
-
The ruling gave cities broad authority to enforce camping bans and remove encampments without it being considered “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment.
-
This reversed years of legal limits that had made many cities cautious about sweeping camps unless they had enough shelter beds available.
-
-
Governor Newsom’s reaction:
-
On July 25, 2024, Newsom issued an executive order urging both state agencies and local governments to move faster in clearing “dangerous” encampments.
-
The order tells agencies to:
-
Identify unsafe camps quickly.
-
Give residents at least 48 hours’ notice before removal.
-
Offer them connections to services or shelter.
-
Store any belongings for at least 60 days so people can reclaim them.
-
-
He presented this as a way to act with “urgency and dignity” while still keeping streets clear.
-
-
The “model ordinance” push:
-
Back in May 2025, Newsom had already released a state model ordinance for cities to adopt voluntarily.
-
This ordinance bans:
-
Staying in one spot for more than three nights in a row.
-
Building “semi‑permanent” structures like wooden shacks.
-
Blocking sidewalks or other public access points.
-
-
The document encourages enforcement, but it also outlines shelter‑first outreach before issuing citations.
-
-
How local cities are already acting:
-
San Francisco and Oakland began increasing sweeps right after the Supreme Court ruling.
-
San Francisco, under Mayor London Breed, started citing people for refusing shelter when beds were available.
-
Oakland has also stepped up camp removals, citing health and safety concerns.
-
-
Criticism of Newsom’s announcement:
-
Some political commentators, including Chronicle columnist Emily Hoeven, say this “new” directive doesn’t contain much that’s actually new.
-
Critics call it symbolic—more public relations than policy change—since many cities were already doing what the order suggests.
-
The executive order doesn’t carry binding legal force over cities; it’s more of a recommendation.
-
-
Funding and pressure on local governments:
-
Since 2019, the state has committed over $27 billion to address homelessness, including $3.3 billion from Proposition 1, a mental health and housing bond.
-
Newsom warned that cities failing to comply with best practices risk losing state funds or having grants withheld.
-
This marks a shift toward using funding as leverage, not just encouragement.
-
-
Pushback from local leaders:
-
The League of California Cities and the State Association of Counties argue that:
-
They need ongoing, reliable funding to address homelessness.
-
The model ordinance is largely symbolic without resources to back it up.
-
-
Homeless advocates say constant sweeps disrupt people’s lives—destroying connections to services, confiscating IDs, and making it harder for people to stabilize.
-
-
Shelter availability reality check:
-
Many California cities still don’t have enough shelter beds for their unsheltered population.
-
Example: Oakland has about 1,300 beds for nearly 3,500 unsheltered residents.
-
San Francisco has more than 3,200 beds, but still more than twice that number of people living outdoors.
-
Some cities, like San Jose, have proposed arresting people who refuse shelter multiple times—a controversial step.
-
-
Impact of more sweeps:
-
In San Francisco, the number of tents visible on the streets has dropped to its lowest since 2019.
-
Police have made more than 760 arrests for illegal lodging since the summer after the ruling.
-
However, complaints about homelessness have gone up—suggesting displacement rather than resolution.
-
Many new complaints are about individuals without tents, often sitting or using drugs in public spaces.
-