LA now has until September to shelter homeless living along freeways

Tents occupied by the homeless line a freeway overpass in Downtown Los Angeles.
AFP via Getty Images

A federal judge is giving Los Angeles a lot more time to move thousands of homeless residents away from freeways.

The city and county now have until September 1 to “humanely” relocate anyone camped within 500 feet of an overpass, underpass, or ramp and into a shelter or “an alternative housing option,” such as a safe parking site or hotel or motel room.

The extension was granted today by U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter in an updated preliminary junction that was initially set to go into effect at noon.

Carter has said that is “unreasonably dangerous” to allow people to live in areas that may be contaminated with lead and other toxins or that carry increased risk of being injured or killed in a car crash or earthquake. He said he was compelled to intervene because neither the city or the county appeared “to be addressing this problem with any urgency.”

“This is a call for local governments to embrace their responsibilities to the unsheltered and to radically rethink how we address the homelessness crisis,” said Daniel Conway, a policy advisor with the LA Alliance for Human Rights, a coalition of nonprofits, service providers, small business owners, and Downtown LA residents suing the city and county over their response to the homeless crisis. “All parties should embrace this opportunity to house thousands of our most needy neighbors at a time when they have never been more at risk.”

Once the city and county meet all of the requirements in the preliminary injunction, they will be able to enforce anti-camping laws around the freeway.

Last week, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti told reporters that he did not view the preliminary injunction as an “order” and said “we hope... we can come to a common agreement.”

Since then, the city and county nearly came to an agreement over how to handle the freeway encampments. But the deal fell apart at the last minute as they squabbled over who would pay for the shelters.

In court filings, the city said it was ready to commit to creating 6,100 new “shelter opportunities” in the next 10 months—if it received “appropriate levels” of funding from the county. But the judge noted that the number included 2,200 hotel and motel rooms already contracted under the state’s Project Roomkey, as well as 1,000 shelter beds that were set up in recreation centers at the start of the pandemic.

In the updated injunction issued today, the judge reminded city county leaders that money for homeless services is ultimately not their property, because it comes from local taxpayers, the state, and federal government.

“The disagreement between the city and county over the relatively minor costs of this pilot program does not bode well for the future as the program is scaled up across the city and county,” Carter wrote. “It is regrettable that this ongoing endeavor to develop humane and sustainable responses to the challenges of homelessness is beleaguered by a legacy of bureaucratic entanglement and gridlock.”

In 2018, Carter issued a similar ruling in Orange County when he ordered officials to immediately house 1,000 living in tent camps in the Santa Ana River. As a result, Orange County cities committed to opening enough shelters to house all the camp residents.

One detail that’s not made clear in the preliminary injunction is where exactly the unhoused residents will go. Due to the novel coronavirus pandemic, the city of LA has turned recreation centers into emergency shelters, which are currently housing 988 people, but cannot add more capacity due to social distancing guidance. The city is also negotiating leases with hotels and motels with a goal of housing 15,000 at-risk homeless residents, but currently only 1,850 rooms are filled.

For decades, Los Angeles has failed to provide enough shelter to house people living on the streets and in their cars. In 2017, a United Nations official who toured Skid Row called LA’s homelessness crisis a “tragic indictment of community and government policies.”

Complying with the preliminary injunction would require a massive undertaking, mostly because Los Angeles County is so large and is traversed by so many freeways. Los Angeles is home to an estimated 974 miles of state and federal freeways traveling through the 4,751 square-mile county. Last year, a point-in-time survey counted 58,936 homeless residents, 44,214 of whom were unsheltered.

The city and county must give reports to the judge on their plans for establishing shelters and clearing the freeway areas, and the judge has threatened to advance the deadline if they don’t “demonstrate satisfactory progress.” The first is due June 12.

Comments

Hey, judge, who’s going to pay to house 50,000 bums, you?

Right? But, after all, to the useful idiots led by their leftist masters, housing is a "right"!!

That said, though – imagine this: now that working from home has become the norm (and thanks to the technological advancements that make that possible today, as opposed to 20 years ago) – imagine how quickly commercial office space values will plummet as more corporations decide to continue to have their employees work from home – office tower after office tower will go unused. This will give the benevolent elites the power to argue that the city ought to buy those towers and repurpose them for the homeless – win-win! Except for the taxpayers, of course…

But then, most of the middle class who actually pay the taxes might well leave altogether, so the governor can put his hand out to the Feds for another trillion bucks or two…I mean, it’s only fair, right?

Perhaps… but they can just retrofit office buildings as market rate housing… which we clearly need more of (in addition to homeless shelters — but those can be built much cheaper, and that seems a lot more likely to actually happen now that political norms have been thrown out the window.)

Do you live in LA? If so, you are

So if I act irresponsibly, and the city does not rush to address my problems, a judge will intercede? That is good to know.

Just one question. How do we protect ourselves from the judge?

This is a nobile attempt by this judge, but ultimately misguided. The homeless are not a monolith. Many are truly down on their luck, temporarily displaced, and will be safer and better off in a shelter. And sadly, many are the kinds of people you would be rightfully scared to be near if they entered your vicinity. Many. And that’s how they ended up homeless. (To be clear, I assign no blame here. Mental Illness and drug issues are scourges I’d wish on nobody but they’re a reality in our world and their impact is frightening to anyone who comes within 10 feet). Concentrating them in shelters is putting gas near fire. I respect the "they’re all just like us but a little short of luck" sentiment this reflects though. It just doesn’t have a firm basis in reality.

Franklin you are mostly right, but people truly down on their luck – and don’t have mental illness or drug addiction – go and live with friends and family. My circle would trip over themselves to help me if I ever lost my job. Yours would too. But people who live on the street have burned every last bridge thanks to – wait for it – mental illness and drug addiction.

These people are sick. We need to treat them as such.

While I don’t like the order as described, I think we should give Judge Carter a chance. He and he alone has been willing to expect results without excuses, and he has shown the ability to bring together many competing interests to that end.

The reason we have 60K+ living on our sidewalks, is not nor has ever been a lack of "affordable housing", but the lack of will on the part of the City of Los Angeles – the Mayor and his Councilmen – for a generation – to stand up for the the normal citizens, and enforce proscriptions on sidewalk camping, from day one.

Judge Carter’s focus is on 10% of the vagrants – about 6,000 people – about twice the number that were moved off the Santa Ana Riverbed and the Plaza of the Flags in OC. It IS achievable, and now, Garcetti and his Council have nowhere to hide.

The courts in LA are closed until July.
They should have hundreds of underutilized cells with beds.

Also, UCLA won’t open until 2021. It should have plenty of empty dorms.

Staples Center parking lot is empty.

The parking lot is empty, but yet we have about 10 tents under the freeway close by. It’s ridiculous.

Los Angeles has tons of money laying around to support a quickly growing homeless population – it won’t be a problem at all. And there will be plenty of money to maintain the streets and sidewalks, fund police, firemen, teachers, schools etc. this pandemic is having no impact on finances – ha.

LA City, LA County, and LAUSD have plenty. They’re just really good at sleight-of-hand, in which they can always cry "poverty", and the abiding media and public never question.

Anyone notice how one side of the street is neat and tidy and the other is a filthy garbage dump? What’s up with that!

The other side of the street isn’t LA City.

Certain streets that border city of LA and another city are strikingly different in their cleanliness simply from one side of the street to the other.

Not just the cleanliness.

The presence of vagrants, gangs and violent felons, and the condition of the roads.

Huh? You’re still around???

"He gave officials one week — until May 22 — to come up with a plan for providing "humane" housing."
They’ll have a "plan" by then and then they will battle for a couple of years.
"Last year, a point-in-time survey counted 58,936 homeless residents, 44,214 of whom were unsheltered."
This is a crisis. I had no idea so many homeless were in LA. There is zero chance LA will comply with the judges’ order. Should be interesting to see what the city says in its response. I bet they spend a lot of money fighting. But, they are flush with cash so no biggie – ha.

I had no idea so many homeless were in LA

If you really want to bend your noodle, consider that the 2005 point-in-time count was 82,291 with 72,413 unsheltered.

I have no idea where you are getting the 2005 numbers from but there’s zero chance we had 20k+ more "unhoused residents" then vs today. Your stat is laughable.

View All Comments
Back to top ↑