Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Substance Use Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board passes ‘Recovery First’ ordinance on first reading and backs state bill to enable recovery housing options
Summary
The Board passed an ordinance on first reading (Item 29) declaring long‑term remission as the city’s primary goal for substance use disorder treatment policy and adopted a resolution backing AB 255, a state bill to fund and certify recovery housing.
On May 6 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed Item 29 on first reading, an ordinance to amend the Administrative Code to establish “long‑term remission of substance use disorders” as the primary goal of the city’s substance use disorder treatment policy. The board also adopted a resolution supporting California Assembly Bill 255 (Item 44), which would authorize state investment in recovery residences and create a certification process for recovery‑oriented housing.
What the city ordinance does
Supervisor Dorsey, the ordinance sponsor, said the legislation clarifies the city’s policy goal: aligning civilian policy with a clinical goal of “a self directed and healthy life free from illicit drug use,” language proposed in part by the San Francisco Marin Medical Society. Dorsey thanked medical professionals and local recovery organizations for input and framed the ordinance as one pillar in a broader “four pillars” approach (prevention, treatment, harm reduction, enforcement).
State bill endorsement
The board also took up a resolution supporting AB 255, introduced by Assemblymember Matt Haney, to permit up to 25 percent of certain funding for permanent supportive housing to be used for certified recovery residences and to expand state investment in drug‑free and recovery housing options. Supervisor Dorsey noted San Francisco had passed a similar resolution previously and that AB 255 corrects how some state funding rules had limited recovery‑oriented options under prior interpretations of Housing First guidance.
Debate and context
Supporters said both the city ordinance and AB 255 expand choices for people in recovery and for residents seeking both housing stability and sobriety. Supervisor Fielder and others emphasized the need to pair treatment access with continued harm‑reduction efforts; supervisors said the measure does not prescribe clinical treatment modalities but sets a policy goal. No vote tallies specific to the AB 255 resolution were contested; Item 29 passed on first reading by an 11–0 voice roll call earlier in the meeting.
What’s next
Item 29 passed on first reading and will return for a second reading and final passage under the board’s ordinance schedule. The board’s resolution supporting AB 255 is a policy endorsement to the state legislature and does not change city law; any state action would require follow‑up at the state level and subsequent local implementation planning for certified recovery housing, should AB 255 pass.
