Lawyers for a coalition of residents and businesses in the Tenderloin neighborhood of San Francisco, spearheaded by the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, filed court papers Friday indicating they'd reached an agreement to settle their lawsuit against the city and county over conditions in the neighborhood.

UC Hastings and the group, which includes a local resident confined to a wheelchair, a manager of a single-room-occupancy hotel, and the part-owner of a local cafe, filed a federal lawsuit last month claiming that local authorities allowed the Tenderloin to become "a containment zone" for drug and homelessness issues, a situation that has further deteriorated since the COVID-19 pandemic. The suit claimed that an influx of people living on Tenderloin streets has combined with the open-air drug sales in the neighborhood to make sidewalk conditions "insufferable."

The stipulated injunction filed with the court Friday, which still requires sign-off from San Francisco's Board of Supervisors and from U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, who is overseeing the case, would require the city to remove up to 300 tents and encampments from the neighborhood's streets by July 20. The move would mark a 70% reduction from the count in a June 5 neighborhood census. Under the injunction, the city has agreed to relocate tent occupants to "shelter-in-place" hotel rooms, safe sleeping villages being established outside the Tenderloin, or off-street sites in the neighborhood, such as parking lots. The injunction also requires the city to enforce narcotics laws "consistently across the city."

"The City is hopeful that most people offered an alternative location will be willing to accept it, but if necessary to comply with this stipulated injunction the City will employ enforcement measures for those who do not accept an offer of shelter or safe sleeping sites to prevent re-encampment," the joint filing says.

Representatives of the mayor's office didn't immediately respond to a message seeking clarification about what enforcement measures might be used for those who refuse to relocate or attempt to return to the neighborhood streets. 

Michael Kelly of Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger, a lawyer for the UC Hastings-led coalition, said that he and his colleagues spent a lot of time making sure that the rights of both the housed and unhoused in the neighborhood were being respected, but that the negotiations didn't go into the "granular detail" of how such situations will be handled. 

"There's no part of what we're doing, we trust, that violates the statutory or constitutional rights of anyone," Kelly said.

Lauren Hansen of The Public Interest Law Project, who represents a group of homeless advocacy groups seeking to intervene in the lawsuit, noted that since the proposed deal doesn't yet have approval from the Board of Supervisors or the judge, it isn't "binding or final."

"We oppose any resolution that results in sweeps and the violation of the constitutional and statutory rights of unhoused persons," she said.

Under the terms of the deal outlined Friday, if either party believed the other to be in breach of the stipulated injunction, they can potentially raise disputes with U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, who has been overseeing settlement talks in the case. If Corley is unable to negotiate a resolution, the dispute would be routed to Tigar.

Read more: