San Francisco Sheriff Vicki Hennessy and national law nonprofit Equal Justice Under Law have reached a settlement in the years-long legal battle that would eliminate the pre-arraignment cash bail schedule in San Francisco.

The proposed agreement, filed Friday night, “takes money out of the equation” by allowing faster assessment of people charged with misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies so that they can be released without having to dig into their pockets to post bail, said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera.

The settlement requires approval by a federal court and the Board of Supervisors before it is final.

The proposal comes more than five months after U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that San Francisco’s cash bail system violated the rights of low-income defendants who couldn’t afford to pay, adding that there was no evidence the system improved public safety. A bail schedule sets bail amounts for crimes and requires suspects to pay that set amount to be released on bail.

“One system of justice for the rich and another for everyone else isn’t justice at all,” Herrera said. “San Francisco led the way when we refused to defend an unconstitutional bail system that allowed the wealthy to pay their way out of jail, even if they posed a danger to the public.”

Legislation to repeal California’s statewide cash bail system — which was to take effect in October — was put on hold this year after bail bond companies qualified a referendum on the issue to go before voters in November 2020.

Other states, including New Jersey and New Mexico, are exploring alternatives to money bail systems. Washington, D.C., has banned money bail since the 1990s, according to Data for Progress, a progressive research firm.

Herrera expanded on the safeguards proposed for the new system — which does not apply to people charged with serious felonies — stating that those accused of violent crimes could not be released without judicial review.

The agreement says the Own Recognizance Project, the city’s pretrial services program, will submit a public safety assessment for San Francisco Superior Court judges to review for each individual. After reviewing the assessment, a judge decides if a person should be released, Hennessy said.

If a judge doesn’t make a decision within 18 hours, individuals will be released or detained, depending on the risk assessment’s determination. The change could mean release for anyone charged with nonserious felonies or misdemeanors within 18 hours, “not just those who could afford to pay money” to post bail, Equal Justice Under Law officials said in a statement.

But within that 18-hour window, law enforcement officials can file a declaration that would extend the detention of a suspect for an additional 12 hours if they believe the person in custody is a danger to public safety.

Hennessy said the Sheriff’s Department has operated a “robust pretrial risk assessment and release program” for years but said the Superior Court’s bail schedule established “an unequal playing field for some pretrial releases” — one that caused an undue burden on people who could not afford to post the bail.

“I’ve worked in and around the county jails for more than four decades,” Hennessy said. “People with means pay their bail and leave jail pre-arraignment while others who don’t have the money may remain incarcerated. With this settlement, the sheriff will no longer release people according to the court’s bail schedule.”

Harmeet Dhillon, an attorney for the California Bail Agents Association, told The Chronicle that the proposed settlement raised constitutional concerns. She said people will have to navigate a “bureaucratic process” that could result in longer detentions than if they just paid a bondsman to provide the bail amount.

“The settlement cuts the judges out of the whole equation. That is a significant concern for public safety and for accountability,” Dhillon said. “The big flaw in this settlement is that the judges are expected to make judgments, but there is no commitment that judges will make determinations within 18 hours, or 30 hours if law enforcement requests additional 12-hour holds. If a judge isn’t available ... then (people charged with a crime) are released based on the pretrial services recommendation.”

Dhillon said that if the settlement is approved, she expects lawsuits by people who may be “denied a quick release because of this settlement and file a constitutional claim.”

Lauren Hernández is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: lauren.hernandez@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @LaurenPorFavor