Supervisors move emergency ordinance to secure 8,250 hotel rooms for quarantine and shelter to full Board

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ Budget & Finance Committee voted to forward an emergency ordinance to the full Board Thursday that would require the city to secure 8,250 private hotel rooms by April 26 to serve as temporary quarantine, recovery and frontline‑worker units and to house people experiencing homelessness who cannot safely isolate.

Supervisor Hillary Ronan, a sponsor of the ordinance, framed the proposal as a public‑health imperative in light of recent shelter outbreaks. “There are over 30,000 vacant hotel rooms in San Francisco right now,” Ronan said, arguing those rooms should be used to move people out of congregate shelters and off the street before they test positive. Ronan told the committee the ordinance would establish reporting requirements to the Board on rooms procured, room usage, and barriers to procurement, and would set standards of care for shelters, navigation centers and other congregate facilities.

Sevin Campbell of the Budget and Legislative Analyst’s office told the committee the measure would require a two‑thirds vote by the full Board to adopt as an emergency ordinance and provided cost estimates: the report lists a one‑month cost for rooms and services of 58,600,000 (transcribed figure) and estimates on‑site management costs of roughly 1.6–1.7 million per month. Campbell said FEMA and the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) could reimburse eligible costs — the BLA used a broad range in its analysis, from roughly $10 million to $40 million per month depending on eligibility — but warned that what those agencies deem eligible is uncertain.

Ben Rosenfield, the city controller, told the committee that if federal or state reimbursements do not cover these costs, the expense would ultimately be borne by the city’s general fund or reserves, although officials had not made final determinations about which reserves would be used.

The committee also questioned whether the ordinance’s eligibility should explicitly include nursing‑home residents and Laguna Honda patients. Doctor Navina Bhabha of the Department of Public Health said DPH had conducted an assessment and moved a small subset of Laguna Honda residents who could safely self‑care to hotels; she said other patients may require higher levels of supervision and that DPH would need to confirm safety before further moves.

Human Services Agency staff described operational hurdles to rapidly opening and staffing hotels. Abigail Stewart Khan and Emily Cohen said the agency had moved approximately 750 people into hotels as of the day before the meeting, with more placements underway, and outlined tasks including wellness checks, meal delivery, cleaning, transport logistics and crisis and behavioral‑health support. They warned some residents decline placement and that staffing capacity is a limiting factor.

Public commenters — including health‑sector workers, nonprofit providers and community organizers — broadly urged rapid action. Laura Foote of Yindi Action and others urged the Board to press for federal reimbursement and to plan for local fiscal impacts if FEMA does not cover placements. Medical speakers stressed the need to house people before they become infected; one caller said the outbreak at MSC South was “entirely preventable.” Service providers asked that eligibility be clarified and that the city coordinate with nonprofit partners and philanthropic resources.

With committee time constrained, Chair (identified in the transcript as Chair Fewer/Feuer) moved the item to the full Board as a committee report with no recommendation. The committee recorded aye votes and the measure will be considered by the full Board at its April meeting for final action.

What’s next: the full Board will consider the emergency ordinance on April 14; because the measure is written as an emergency ordinance it would require a two‑thirds affirmative vote at adoption. The BLA and department staff emphasized the cost and reimbursement uncertainties that will affect the city’s fiscal exposure.