City updates Fixed Lead SF abatement program; 12 projects complete, targeted rollout in three ZIP codes

San Francisco’s Department of the Environment and the Department of Public Health updated the Commission on the Environment on Aug. 26 on Fixed Lead SF, a city program that does permanent lead abatement in private residences and child‑serving facilities.

The program — launched after long litigation against lead paint manufacturers and co‑implemented by both departments — prioritizes abatement instead of temporary interim controls, staff said. "We decided to do more abatement work, which results in a greater level of long term health protection," said Paul Gray, an environmental specialist with the environment department.

Why it matters: Lead is a neurotoxin that disproportionately harms children, affecting IQ, growth and behavior. Karen (senior environmental health inspector) told commissioners, “We have estimated that there are over 200,000 residential units in San Francisco that probably contain lead based paint and lead in the soil,” and emphasized that abatement is the only method to permanently reduce exposure.

Progress and scope: Presenters said the program received about 30 applications, has completed 12 projects and has seven additional projects in various stages of review or construction. Ryan Ramos, a senior environmental specialist, said, "To date, the program has spent, approximately $600,000 on the project work," covering testing, removal, relocation and associated services.

Targeting and eligibility: Staff said the program is concentrating an initial rollout in ZIP codes 94110 (Mission), 94112 (Outer Mission/Excelsior) and 94124 (Bayview) based on public‑health data and childhood blood‑lead records. Staff also said projects are prioritized where children live; owners with children pay no cost, while units without children in a multifamily building may require cost sharing. Ramos said, “It is no cost to the owner if they have children… units without children, we have a cost share.”

Technical and operational constraints: Paul Gray explained that abatement decisions are site specific and can involve full removal and replacement of windows, doors and trim — work that can trigger asbestos testing and relocation of residents. He warned that there are relatively few certified lead‑abatement contractors in the Bay Area and that cost per job increases with complex scopes.

Budget and administration: Staff said the program has set aside multi‑million dollars to fund projects and administrator costs, and that the program’s contract with the administrator, Rebuilding Together San Francisco, is five years with an option to extend. Ramos said the city has set aside funds to scale the program and intends to increase its spend rate in upcoming years to draw down awarded funds.

Questions from commissioners focused on whether the program is time‑bound, public‑housing outreach and how the city will identify qualifying households. Staff said many public‑housing units have already been retrofitted, and that current enrollments are driven mainly by Department of Public Health referrals tied to elevated blood‑lead levels; they said they will pursue additional proactive outreach strategies and promotor(a) community‑health worker engagement to raise awareness.

What’s next: Staff said they will scale outreach, build a larger bench of contractors, and look for complementary funding to address structural barriers — such as extensive roof or wall repairs — that otherwise prevent lead‑abatement work. No formal policy action or vote occurred; the commission received the update for discussion.

Provenance: Presentation and Q&A at the Commission meeting (topic introduction SEG 359; presentation and Q&A concluding SEG 970).