The city of Los Angeles is on the brink of having a court-appointed receiver take charge of its homelessness spending amidst mounting criticism of its handling of the homeless crisis.
This development comes as the city government has found itself back in federal court, accused of failing to comply with a settlement agreement stemming from a lawsuit initiated by the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights.
The Alliance, a coalition of downtown residents and business owners, filed the lawsuit in 2020 in response to the proliferation of sidewalk encampments, despite increased taxes and spending aimed at addressing homelessness.
The case, overseen by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, has seen the judge aggressively challenge public officials, urging them to take meaningful action against the homelessness crisis.
Following a settlement reached in 2022, the Alliance contends that the city has fallen short of fulfilling the terms of the agreement, leading to renewed court proceedings to assess the city’s actions—or lack thereof.
An evidentiary hearing has been in progress for the last two weeks to gather evidence regarding the city’s attempts to tackle homelessness and to evaluate what further action might be necessary.
Reports reveal that despite significant financial investments, such as new taxes and the expenditure of taxpayer dollars, tens of thousands of unhoused individuals continue to reside in tent encampments throughout public spaces.
The financial burden on the city has grown, culminating in the hiring of the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher for legal representation in this ongoing battle, with the city committing to a $900,000 contract over two years.
Critics are pointing out that relying on lawsuits and settlements has not proven effective in addressing the underlying issue of homelessness.
Indeed, the very lawsuits intended to protect the rights of the unhoused have inadvertently contributed to the exacerbation of the crisis.
A notable example is the ordinance that made it illegal to sit, lie, or sleep on public sidewalks, which was challenged in 2003 by the ACLU in the case of Jones v. Los Angeles.
The subsequent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit emphasized that punishing individuals for sitting, lying, or sleeping on sidewalks was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment, provided they had no shelter.
Instead of appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, the city settled the case in 2007, agreeing to halt the enforcement of the ban until a specified number of housing units for the chronically homeless were completed.
Although the housing was constructed, enforcement of the ban was never resumed.
This non-enforcement reality was further complicated by another case, Martin v. Boise, where the Ninth Circuit reiterated that cities cannot enforce bans on public camping unless sufficient shelter space is available for all unhoused individuals.
As the legal landscape shifted again, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson last summer established that cities do retain the authority to impose anti-camping ordinances constitutionally.
Despite this ruling, Los Angeles remains firm in its policy of non-enforcement, seemingly waiting for individuals in tent encampments to voluntarily accept services rather than compelling action through government means.
Critics argue that the city’s current stance places the responsibility solely on unhoused individuals while taxpayers bear the brunt of the financial strain.
As discussions loom over the potential appointment of a receiver to oversee L.A.’s homelessness spending, it’s worth noting that the existing structures—including the county’s Executive Committee, Leadership Table, and various homelessness services—have not brought about significant improvements.
As this situation continues to unfold, one thing is clear: all parties involved in the bureaucracy seem insulated from the immediate consequences of homelessness, highlighting a disconnect between governance and the lived realities of unhoused individuals in Los Angeles.
image source from：https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2025/06/05/after-years-of-failure-las-homelessness-spending-could-go-under-receivership/
