Stepping aside from the question of whether or not any city that is not a city-state, can be a failed state, the answer is still no. San Francisco is fully abl

Stepping aside from the question of whether or not any city that is not a city-state, can be a failed state, the answer is still no. San Francisco is fully able to govern its populace. It may not be choosing to take action on, for example, homeless people using illegal drugs in public view, or shoplifting, or what-have-you, but that's not because it does not have the ability to. If San Francisco elected a law-and-order type government tomorrow, it still has the wherewithal to do this. As a question of values, etc. it may be that it has chosen, for example, to tolerate the mentally-ill or drug-addicted homeless being in public view rather than shut away somewhere. One could even hold the plausible opinion that they have gone too far in this direction. But, it still holds the ability to do so if those in charge of the government decided to, so it does not resemble places like Somalia or Afghanistan that have had recent periods in which they were failed states. Also, if they did truly begin to resemble a failed state, either the California or the US government, or both, could step in to regain control. At some level, the awareness of this (as well as the knowledge that any given individual can always drive to another town whenever they want) is part of why current policies remain in place.