James Reem has lived in a tent on the corner of Fell and Baker streets for more than a year. An artist by trade, he said he was evicted from his apartment after troubles with his landlord and for a time lived out of a van. After the van got towed, someone gave him a tent and he turned to the streets.

His tent sits outside the city’s only DMV office, across the street from the Panhandle, a lush strip of greenery that opens into Golden Gate Park in a family-friendly neighborhood adorned by rows of manicured Victorians.

It’s a comfortable spot, said Reem, 59, with a sidewalk wide enough to accommodate his tent and still leave room for pedestrians. Some days, Reem is one of a dozen or more tent-dwellers on the concrete stretch.

“There are a few of us that stick together,” Reem said.

“They’re not concerned about the homeless,” James Reem said of San Francisco’s plans for encampment sweeps. “They’re concerned about getting rid of us.”

(Hannah Wiley / Los Angeles Times)

His adopted neighborhood is among dozens of sites likely to be targeted as the city launches what Mayor London Breed has said will be an assertive campaign to force people off the streets in response to a June ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

An estimated 8,300 people are living homeless in San Francisco. And despite a years-long effort to move people into temporary shelter or permanent housing, unsanctioned encampments remain a widespread and visible problem, often accompanied by garbage, theft and open drug use.

For years, Breed and other city officials said their hands were tied by decisions issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which covers many Western states, that deemed it cruel and unusual punishment to penalize someone for sleeping on the streets if no legal shelter was available.

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed that decision in a pivotal June 28 ruling, saying that cities in California and the West may enforce laws restricting homeless encampments on sidewalks and other public property.

On Thursday, citing the ruling, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order requiring state agencies to remove encampments in their jurisdictions. While the directive doesn’t require cities to follow suit, Newsom urged them to do so, characterizing the proliferation of encampments as a health and safety hazard that requires immediate action.

Breed, a fellow Democrat, has also embraced the ruling. She said last week that, armed with the high court’s decision, she will spearhead a “very aggressive” effort to clear homeless encampments beginning in August. She said the effort could include criminal penalties for refusing to disperse.

Breed was not available for an interview Friday, and her office has yet to provide details of what the sweeps will entail or where people living in tents are expected to relocate. Her spokesperson, Jeff Cretan, said some of those details would come into clearer focus next week.

During a July 18 mayoral debate hosted by the local firefighters union, Breed acknowledged her decision to orchestrate sweeps was “not a popular” one but said it was a necessary step.

“We have had to move from a compassionate city to a city of accountability,” she said. “And I have been leading the efforts to ensure we are addressing this issue differently than we have before.”

She said the city has worked over the last several years to add shelter beds and disperse outreach workers to offer services and support. But even when outreach workers offer shelter, according to the mayor’s office, those offers are rejected nearly 70% of the time.

San Francisco has experimented with sanctioned tent cities in an effort to address the needs of its homeless population.

(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

Breed’s crackdown is likely to offer headlines out of San Francisco that counter the narratives promoted by conservative pundits as Vice President Kamala Harris ramps up her presidential campaign. Her Republican opponents have long tried to paint Harris, who rose to political power in 2004 as San Francisco’s elected district attorney, as a California liberal whose policies have helped contribute to the surging homelessness and retail crime plaguing her home state.

But the Supreme Court’s ruling is proving divisive for California’s local Democratic leaders. More left-leaning Democrats, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, say the decision will allow cities to criminalize homelessness without doing anything to address the root causes, including addiction and a dearth of affordable housing. It’s a sentiment echoed by homeless advocates.

“This order won’t reduce homelessness or deter encampments, but it will leave vulnerable people even farther away from home and health than they are today,” Sharon Rapport, state policy director for the Corporation for Supportive Housing, said in an emailed statement.

Whether San Francisco has enough shelter beds to accommodate the potential wave of people pushed off the streets is unclear. Since Breed took office, the city has expanded shelter beds from about 2,500 to nearly 4,000, her office said, and has expanded permanent supportive housing to about 14,000 slots.

The DMV encampment where Reem lives is one of several that city officials have cleared time and again, only to see it return days later. So far this year, the encampment has been cleared more than a dozen times, according to the mayor’s office.

Reem says he feels safer outside than he does in an emergency shelter, where he worries about his belongings getting stolen. He said he would accept help from city workers. But he also said he thinks Breed’s plan is less about helping people like him than it is about clearing out tents that make the public uncomfortable.

“They’re not concerned about the homeless,” he said. “They’re concerned about getting rid of us.”