HOMELESSNESS
OVERVIEW
As Councilmember, I am committed to addressing homelessness by implementing proven solutions that will actually eradicate homelessness as a systemic issue in the long term.
Our policy tools will meet people’s needs, and benefit both housed and unhoused members of our district. Solving this issue will take bravery, and our district deserves a representative who will lead with bravery on an issue that requires grace, compassion and seriousness.
Homelessness is LA’s largest challenge. It even goes beyond what we can sometimes see on the street, it also includes individuals experiencing temporary instability: living in cars or couch surfing, families doubling up, or those who decide that long-term vehicular living is more sustainable for them. The more precarious someone’s access to housing or shelter, the harder and more complex it can be to get folks back to stability. Individual factors like mental health struggles, substance abuse can be worsened or even manifest because of the experience of being homeless. In order for solutions to be effective and longlasting, each of these different situations and each of these individual contributing factors must be addressed specifically and with care. These specific approaches must be incorporated into the larger system of bringing folks into housing.
The rising cost of housing is the major driver of homelessness, which has only worsened in cities like Los Angeles, where housing costs far exceed wages. Regardless of how effective any city is at helping people to get housed, the problem will never be solved if we don’t create systems to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place. This is why we have paired this work with our robust housing policy. In addition to the overall affordability crisis, historical practices that denied communities of color investment and resources, have left certain neighborhoods more vulnerable to displacement and gentrification, and our inadequate and fragmented social safety net means those who most need our help to get housed, or stay housed, are left stranded.
Aside from the unconscionably wealthy, every resident of CD 11 is familiar with how the rising cost of living and particularly the rising cost of housing can have a devastating impact on any given household. Our country provides very little in the way of a social safety net in comparison to other economically developed nations, and as a result, many families live paycheck to paycheck or close to it. This economic precariousness leaves almost any family vulnerable to losing their housing due to factors beyond their control. Our residents who lost homes in the devastating Palisades fires last year, know this precarity all too well. This shared vulnerability must be a constant element of our approach to homelessness. We must draw on the deep wells of compassion the people of Los Angeles hold in reserves for times of crisis as we approach what is understood by several international organizations to be a humanitarian crisis of homelessness in our city.
By choosing to repeatedly spend on sweeps that produce temporary results, the incumbent councilmember has been more willing to improve the appearance of the crisis for political gain instead of using those resources to permanently house individuals and eliminate the recurring concerns of neighbors entirely. Instead of repeatedly spending millions to temporarily move tents, we should invest that money into diverse housing options, robust service provision targeted care, and trust building.
HOUSING TO SOLVE HOMELESSNESS
Prevent homelessness
The most effective strategy we have for addressing homelessness is preventing Angelenos from falling into homelessness in the first place. The number of unhoused Angelenos placed into permanent housing has increased significantly over the last several years. Yet we don’t see massive declines in homelessness because the progress our services system is making in getting people out of homelessness every year is being overshadowed by the numbers of Angelenos falling into homelessness every day. In 2024 alone, a total of 28,000 unhoused Angelenos were connected to permanent housing in LA County, and over the past 3 years, the number has increased to nearly 78,000. Since January 2024, there have been more that 100,000 eviction notices filed with the Housing Department due to the steeply increasing level of rent burden and affordability crisis. If we were able to prevent all people from falling into homelessness in Los Angeles, and our homelessness system continued to house people at its current rate, we would be on track to end homelessness in LA in less than 5 years.
To learn more about how my office will prevent homelessness, read our Housing and Tenants Rights platform.
Build more interim shelter and permanent supportive housing
Addressing homelessness in a meaningful and permanent manner can only work if we offer housing that is actually viable to our unhoused neighbors. Our city has been playing fast and loose with what qualifies as “housing” offered, blurring the lines around temporary shelter, interim housing, and long term stabilized housing. We need more in-district interim housing AND permanent supportive housing units. Permanent supportive housing is deeply affordable housing with services for chronically unhoused people. While permanent housing should always be at the forefront of our strategy to end homelessness, transitional housing serves as a dignified place to receive social support while individuals work towards more permanent housing solutions. In CD11 we need all of the above.
We need to invest in innovative, voluntary models of transitional housing which have been effective in other parts of LA, for example models like CD5’s Midvale project. Moreover, while interim housing should be accessible to all who want it, certain populations, including veterans, survivors of domestic violence, transition-age youth, foster youth, LGBTQ+ individuals, and seniors are not only in greater need of context-specific housing, but are also far more likely to accept services and successfully transition to permanent housing when interim options are tailored to their specific needs. We will prioritize environments that are more specific, and more supportive to the needs of our most vulnerable neighbors. In LA there are simply not enough context-specific shelters or interim beds.
We have an opportunity to build on the success already occurring in our district around specialized interim shelters. Recently, a federal court has reinforced the need for the Department of Veteran Affairs to build more than 2,500 units of housing on its West Los Angeles Campus, which includes 1,800 permanent housing units and 750 temporary housing units in our district. The Federal Court’s decision and this strategy are being seen as an attainable pathway to end veteran homelessness nationwide. Our goal is to apply this same results-driven approach to other highly vulnerable populations, and move them permanently out of homelessness.
However, we need to protect the existence of these housing units from the political will of politicians who intend to continue kicking the can down the road, instead of doing the work to end this crisis long term. Under our current Councilmember’s leadership the westside has lost shelter beds, deepening our homelessness crisis. The Venice Bridge Home shelter, which provided critical interim beds for both adults and teens, closed abruptly at the end of 2024, a loss that Councilmember Park herself acknowledged but made no effort to replace. At the same time, she opposed the Venice Dell project, a permanent supportive housing project that was supported by most local constituents and would have created long-term stability rather than temporary displacement. The Venice Dell Project could still move forward as soon as the city ceases blocking its development.
Streamline permitting for interim housing models that meet best-practices design.
I will invest in interim housing models that prioritize privacy, security, and dignity and are associated with increased service uptake and permanent housing placement. California’s SB 2 requires cities to plan for and allow emergency shelters and transitional housing by-right, preventing local zoning or political obstruction from blocking needed housing. As a councilmember, I will uphold SB 2 and use it to streamline the approval and construction of shelters and interim housing in Council District 11
Clear pathway to permanent housing.
I will require that all city-funded interim sites have a clear pathway to permanent housing with dedicated housing navigators and case managers that help clients navigate hurdles such as acquiring IDs, actualizing employment pathways, and enrolling in benefits.
Build permanent supportive housing (PSH).
The homelessness that is most visible in our neighborhoods is often driven by people with the highest needs. For these individuals, permanent supportive housing, long-term housing paired with on-site services, is the most effective intervention. Los Angeles’ investment through Proposition HHH has demonstrated that PSH works, successfully housing people experiencing chronic homelessness. Therefore, we must continue building PSH at scale and protect these projects from political interference, because without permanent housing, there is no permanent solution.
STREET HOMELESSNESS RESOLUTION AND SERVICES
Resolve street homelessness, no more shortcuts
The district's current solution to homelessness has focused on displacement and criminalization of the homeless rather than true solutions. In practice, this means the City responds to visible homelessness by clearing encampments through sweeps, or forcing people to relocate by designating areas as 41.18 zones. Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Section 41.18 prohibits camping, sitting, or storing personal belongings in public spaces such as sidewalks, streets, and areas near schools, parks, and libraries, and allows the City to remove people and their belongings after posting notice. When the Los Angeles Sanitation and Environment department (LASAN) conducts sweeps they destroy encampments and the property of unhoused people, and when the LAPD is involved they respond to encampments with arrests, citations, and other destructive actions. Although unhoused people account for less than 1 percent of the overall population of the city, 38 percent of all arrests in Los Angeles were of people identified as unhoused, including over 99 percent of all infraction arrests and citations, and over 42 percent of all misdemeanors.
Among the seven steps council members are required to complete before clearing an encampment, none require that individuals be offered housing. 41.18 is not intended to be a policy to solve homelessness. Not only does it not solve homelessness, it ends up putting people seeking housing further behind on their path to being housed. As a result, people are simply moved from one location to another. 4 out of 10 individuals engaged by LAHSA from 41.18 enforcement returned to their campsite no sooner than 14 days after sign posting.
Contrary to popular narratives about homelessness, people experiencing homelessness are trying very hard to get housed. The inconvenient reality is that more often than not, our existing systems thwart people’s efforts to find housing. 41.18 is a perfect example of this. The story is told that unhoused people must be forced to accept housing, but in reality permanent housing is never offered during sweeps. 94% of people impacted by 41.18 wanted to be connected to housing and only 18% were placed into housing. LAHSA provided shelter or housing referrals to any person at only 10 percent of the sweeps and only 3 percent of people attained shelter or housing, but their presence at the sweeps lends a veneer of legitimacy to the destruction by allowing officials to claim they are offering services more broadly.
This approach is not only ineffective, it’s extremely expensive to taxpayers. According to the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), implementation of 41.18 during the 18 month period from September of 2021 through December of 2023 cost the city approximately $2.83 million. Of that amount, $1.8 million was spent on just the creation and posting of signage.
Ultimately, our current approach has been costly, ineffective, and inhumane. Data demonstrates that the failure is not a lack of willingness from unhoused people, but a failure of outreach to meaningfully connect people to housing options that actually meet their needs and are viable.
Address basic hygiene needs for everyone.
I will invest in toilets, showers, and handwashing stations across the district. Not only is access to water and hygiene a basic human right, but research confirms that lack of toilets and handwashing stations creates serious health risks for people experiencing homelessness and the broader community. Hygiene infrastructure is an important part of a continuum of care, designed to protect health while housing solutions are pursued rather than rewarding or incentivizing homelessness. Beyond their utility for people experiencing homelessness, everyone benefits from having public hygiene infrastructure available.
Spot cleanings as the first response to managing public space.
We will prioritize encampment-led spot cleanings that improve health and safety without displacement. Spot cleaning refers to routine, low‑impact sanitation actions, such as collecting trash adjacent to encampments, providing waste disposal, and addressing immediate health hazards. Spot cleanings do not include confiscating or destroying personal property, and instead offer an opportunity to build trust and offer support toward housing solutions. Evidence shows these non-punitive cleanings are widely welcomed by unhoused residents and effectively address sanitation concerns while maintaining stability and trust for all of our constituents.
CARE+ as a tool to move people towards housing and stability.
CARE+ is Los Angeles’ most involved encampment response program, managed by LASAN. At the time of its development, CARE+ was intended to be the combination of deep sanitation services with direct outreach and support for individuals experiencing homelessness. Since its creation, CARE+ has become a double edged sword. When utilized at the request of encampments, it can be the service it was intended for, however, when weaponized against people experiencing homelessness, CARE+ sweeps often come with LAPD presence, poor outreach, and wholesale destruction of what little people have. Decades of politicians passing the buck of managing street homelessness has pit neighbor against neighbor with little improvement for our constituents, housed and unhoused. We will implement CARE+ as a tool to address the public health concerns that affect both our housed and unhoused neighbors. We will have dedicated field deputies and unhoused constituent caseworkers responding to constituent concerns around encampments who will conduct robust outreach in collaboration with mutual aid groups and unhoused residents. By adopting this approach, which a growing number of council offices already follow with success, we’ll build trust with residents, connect individuals to the services they need, and create conditions that are conducive to permanent housing.
Expand pilots for clinician-led mobile crisis teams:
Modeled on DMH’s Hollywood 2.0 and UCLA’s Homeless Healthcare Collaborative, I will fund programs that provide 24/7, clinician-led, mobile crisis response for unhoused people and those at risk of becoming homeless. These teams will respond to behavioral health crises in place, de-escalate situations, and connect people to voluntary care and support without involving law enforcement.
Increase access to evidence-based substance use treatment:
I will champion adequate funding for substance use treatment that would allow increasing the number of clinics (and their operating hours) that provide MAT for opioid use disorder and medications for alcohol use disorder, expanding low-barrier clinics that do not require extensive paperwork and provide same-day walk-in assistance, and deploying mobile health, or street medicine, teams equipped to treat substance use.
Address vehicular homelessness
Much like our approach to encampments, our attempts to resolve vehicular homelessness have been misinformed. According to a UCLA survey, 13,549 people live in vehicles across LA County. In CD11, 99 residents dwelling in West LA were interviewed and reported that they share merely 2 safe parking sites offered in CD11. More than half of vehicle residents had received no housing or shelter offer in the prior 3 months. Of those who did, 60% said no one followed up, and 29% were simply put on a waitlist. And yet more than 80% said they would accept a housing voucher and wanted access to low-income apartments. While waiting for housing, nearly half lost a vehicle to towing, and 22% owe over $1,500 in tickets, often just for being too poor to afford registration. These are Angelenos who built their own safety net when no public one existed. And we’ve responded by criminalizing their survival. We need to stop pushing people deeper into poverty to try to protect themselves. We must stop treating poverty like a parking violation and instead implement more safe parking sites where people can safely park overnight who are living out of their vehicle and are connected to services.
Remove parking restrictions without real alternatives.
I will suspend, or limit, “No RV Parking” zones unless accessible parking options are available for vehicular residents.
Dedicated 24/7 safe parking sites.
I will update zoning and municipal codes to allow vehicle dwelling, inclusive of RVs and not just cars, on sites that are publicly owned, and underutilized lands, simultaneously avoiding conflict with daytime use and providing stability for people living in vehicles.
Remove program eligibility barriers.
I will work to eliminate requirements for ID, insurance, registration, or a fixed address to access safe parking.
Pair safe parking with on-site services.
Much like our approach towards encampments, I will embed case management and housing navigation support at safe parking sites, by having our internal field team work closely with partnering service providers.
Spend public money responsibly
There is growing skepticism about the government’s ability to provide competent, compassionate solutions to homelessness. Mismanagement of public funds by bad actors, without sufficient oversight from elected officials, has been detrimental to public trust. Most recently, audits from the City Controller’s office led to the arrest and federal indictment of Alexander Soofer, Executive Director of Abundant Blessings, for allegedly obtaining $23 million of public money under fraudulent auspices. The collapse of the Skid Row Housing Trust, once one of the largest supportive housing providers in downtown Los Angeles, has been widely documented as a failure of financial management,while city‑contracted Urban Alchemy “safe sleep” site which was found to have been paid for 88 beds but actually had only 44 in operation, also prompted closures and questions about accountability.
To regain and rebuild the public trust we must provide transparency of all funding earmarked for homelessness solutions. Providing this transparency will not be simple. The homelessness funding ecosystem is complicated, with funding distributed by both governmental agencies and philanthropic entites, who often contract with private service providers to deliver essential services. This means service providers are combining different funding streams to cover the costs of their operations. For example, the funding for a single staff member’s role at a nonprofit agency could be derived from 3 or more unique funding streams.
Moreover, a lot of “homelessness spending” comes from LA City departments like sanitation, police, parking enforcement, etc, so this spending is not necessarily clearly defined as spending on “homelessness.” Currently, reporting on this spending is designed to assist in ensuring compliance and not to ensure transparency, i.e. not to show everyday Angelenos how dollars from multiple departments come together to address homelessness.
Oversight of all shelter and permanent housing providers.
I will dedicate resources and staff to monitor housing operators in LA City to verify that the services they provide meet standardized quality of care. We will work with the City Controller’s office to ensure that regular audits are being conducted.
Ensure 100% utilization of shelter beds.
Our team will monitor occupancy rates in real time to maximize efficient use of the shelter resources that we do have.
Build a homeless spending public dashboard.
Working closely with the new Bureau of Homelessness Oversight within the Los Angeles Housing Department, I will require every City department to tag homelessness-related spending in their existing budgets and financial systems, and publish a real-time, public dashboard that shows total City homelessness spending. This will move the City beyond fragmented reporting toward real transparency, and give us an opportunity to demonstrate the utility of the Bureau of Homelessness Oversight and render it a permanent part of how Los Angeles City governs homelessness spending, not just a time-limited pilot.
Invest in our homeless services workforce.
By updating City contracting standards, and collaborating with the County where programs are jointly funded, I will advocate for homelessness contracts that reflect livable wages, realistic staffing models, and sustainable workloads for frontline workers. Treating the workforce with dignity will reduce turnover and improve program outcomes for our unhoused Angelenos.