Board votes to close County Jail No. 4, sets November deadline and oversight requirements

San Francisco supervisors voted 10–1 on May 5 to pass on first reading an ordinance directing the closure of County Jail Number 4 at the Hall of Justice by Nov. 1, 2020, and to create a Safety and Justice Challenge subcommittee to plan for population reductions and a safe transition.

The ordinance requires the city to reduce its daily jail population so that the remaining jail facilities operate at no more than 90% of capacity—established in the ordinance as 1,044 daily inmates—before County Jail No. 4 may be closed. The measure also directs the new subcommittee to submit progress reports to the Board of Supervisors in August and October with data and policy recommendations for safely meeting the population targets.

Sponsor Supervisor Catherine Feuer said she worked with justice partners and stakeholders to craft a timeline and safeguards that address operational concerns while accelerating the long‑acknowledged need to retire the seismically unsafe facility. Feuer noted the facility had been slated for demolition for years and described the ordinance as an “aggressive” but necessary timeline.

Shakira Simley, director of the Office of Racial Equity, presented the office’s initial impact assessment, telling the board that closing the jail would reduce racial disparities in San Francisco’s criminal justice system by reducing unnecessary detention and encouraging alternatives such as pretrial diversion. “The closure of County Jail Number 4 and a safe reduction of San Francisco’s jail population will significantly mitigate racial disparities,” Simley said in her presentation.

Sheriff Paul Miyamoto told the board his office supports closure but asked for flexibility to respond to fluctuating jail population needs during the COVID‑19 pandemic. He confirmed the city plans to move the Seventh Floor population into County Jails 2 and 5 if necessary and that the ordinance was drafted to preserve limited operational contingency for the sheriff’s department.

Supervisor Stephanie said she supports closing the building but voted no, citing unresolved public‑safety questions and requests for more detailed information about the charges and risk profiles of people who might be affected. Other supervisors pressed for explicit prohibitions on out‑of‑county transfers; the ordinance specifies that the subcommittee’s plan should not include transfers to out‑of‑county facilities.

The ordinance includes two non‑substantive amendments requested by the sheriff: language allowing limited, temporary continued use of some County Jail No. 4 support facilities (for example, laundry or kitchen functions) if necessary while upgrades are completed at other jails, and language clarifying that the subcommittee may consult public‑health agencies and labor unions representing impacted workers.

The ordinance passed first reading with 10 supervisors voting aye and Supervisor Stephanie dissenting. The ordinance is subject to further committee and Board action before final passage.