“If you know you need to get off of and away from drugs, you shouldn’t be forced into housing where drug use is allowed and where recovery is not supported,” he said. “Some folks won’t go into housing because they know that it actually is dangerous for them because they’re still experiencing an addiction. … This isn’t about having zero tolerance to drug use. It’s about having environments where recovery is explicitly supported, and that is the goal.”

But according to Newsom, jurisdictions can already use state dollars to “support recovery housing.”

“That was news to most cities and counties,” Haney said after AB 255 was vetoed.

Newsom said in his veto message that he believes “recovery-focused” housing is essential, but that Haney’s legislation would require the state to establish a separate — and costly — certification and oversight process. The Senate Appropriations Committee estimated that creating the new regulatory system would have cost more than $4 million in its first year.

Instead, he pointed to guidance the California Interagency Council on Homelessness published in July, which allows jurisdictions to access state funding for recovery housing already.

A series of tents lined up along a city sidewalk.
A homeless encampment on a sidewalk in San Francisco on Sept. 2, 2023. (Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

According to the guidance, recovery housing programs “may include sobriety requirements; however, the decision to pursue sobriety must be made by the participant.”

The idea, it says, is that choice is central to the Housing First framework — “This includes the choice to participate in recovery housing and sober living programs, programs with a focus on implementing harm reduction methods, or other programs.”

“People using substances or in recovery from substance use disorders have diverse needs, goals, and interests and should be provided with meaningful choice within the housing and services options available to them,” the guidance continues.

After the veto, Haney and San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie, who co-sponsored the bill, both said they were disappointed but would continue to create housing “across the spectrum” at the city level.

The legislation announced Tuesday appears poised to do just that.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *