Overview

• AB 255 would have let cities and counties direct up to 10% of state homelessness funds to certified recovery housing and included safeguards so residents would not be evicted solely for relapsing.
• Newsom’s veto message called the proposal unnecessary and a duplicative, costly new statutory category, pointing to existing rules he says already permit support for recovery housing.
• The bill envisioned a new state certification and oversight system that the Senate Appropriations Committee estimated would cost about $4.12 million in the first year, with fees unlikely to fully offset expenses.
• Assemblymember Matt Haney and housing providers disputed the governor’s interpretation and urged clear, formal guidance so jurisdictions know whether and how they can fund sober living programs.
• Newsom’s office referenced a January draft from the California Interagency Council on Homelessness stating abstinence-based housing can align with housing first when chosen by the participant, while San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie, a co-sponsor, warned the veto could hinder the city’s expansion of drug-free options.