In the face of rising tensions over San Francisco's approach to homelessness, advocates are doubling down on their demand for the city to house its unhoused residents in more than 700 vacant homes, as city officials gear up for another round of so-called "aggressive" sweeps. The push from community leaders, intensifying amidst Mayor London Breed's crackdown on homeless encampments, comes with a stark assessment of the current tactics and the clear message that the city is failing its most vulnerable citizens, reported KTVU.

Last week, Governor Gavin Newsom put his weight behind the removal of homeless camps from state-owned properties, which, according to NBC Bay Area, further compels the city's actions. However, the advocacy groups are not just sitting idly by. They rallied in front of Hotel Whitcomb, a notable landmark left vacant since the pandemic, to criticize the city's strategy and advocate for these empty spaces to be used to provide permanent housing for people sleeping on the streets, per Bay City News reporting on KTVU. The hotel itself was utilized as an emergency shelter during the COVID-19 crisis and remains a symbol of potential housing solutions not yet tapped into by the city.

According to data reviewed by Hoodline San Francisco, there are currently 793 permanent supportive housing units open, with 398 offline due to needed repairs and another 229 in the process of being occupied – leaving 166 units ostensibly available. Advocates argue many of these units require refurbishment, but represent a tangible immediate step toward addressing the homelessness crisis.

This advocacy comes as San Francisco increases its encampment cleanups, spurring controversy over its approach. Mayor Breed has deemed these sweeps, part of her "Journey Home Executive Directive," as an essential strategy to manage the crisis, as earlier reported by Hoodline San Francisco. Yet, attorneys and advocates for the unhoused argue for the utilization of vacant units as opposed to the directive’s proposed relocation services, which have been met with criticism for prioritizing moving individuals out of the city over finding them sustainable housing within it.

The recent legal landscape has fostered a shifting environment. The Supreme Court's decision, effectively allowing cities to clear encampments without facing immediate legal rebuke, has emboldened state and city officials to act but has also activated a renewed zeal among advocates. They maintain their fight for civil rights, due process, and the fundamental dignity of all individuals, regardless of their housing status. As John Do, senior attorney for the ACLU of Northern California, told Bay City News, "The Eighth Amendment no longer stops the government from arresting you and jailing you for just sleeping outside, but that decision doesn’t end other civil rights and important protections that we all have. So we’re still here, and we’re going to defend things like due process, equal protection, the Fourth and 14th Amendment, and state and local protections too. So the fight's not over." It appears, therefore, that the contentious battle over how to best address homelessness in San Francisco is far from reaching its denouement.