US judge seizes broad authority to solve LA’s homeless crisis

The city and county of Los Angeles was ordered Tuesday to provide shelter for all skid row residents by a federal judge who called the governments' alleged inaction "a continued failure to meaningfully confront the crisis of homelessness."

"The time has come to redress these wrongs and finish another measure of our nation's unfinished work," U.S. District Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California wrote in his 110-page ruling granting LA Alliance for Human Rights' preliminary injunction motion.

Carter's ruling came a day after Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti announced plans to spend close to $1 billion to address the homelessness crisis. Carter wrote that Garcetti's plan was not adequate, as the majority of it would be taken from funds allocated under a proposition that already funded such relief. The 2016 ballot measure, Proposition HHH, allowed the city to issue up to $1.2 billion in general obligation bonds to subsidize the development of 10,000 housing units.

In Tuesday's order, Carter wrote that, despite getting state and federal funding for Project Roomkey, "the city and county never managed to contract even a third of the promised 15,000 hotel and motel rooms." Project Roomkey was an initiative to rent hotel rooms for homeless people during the pandemic.

"In spite of abundant funding drawn from local, state and federal budgets, the city and county fell far short of their stated goal. This embarrassing performance does not inspire confidence, to say the least, in the city's new budget," Carter wrote. "From mishandling Project Roomkey to sinking $1.25 billion into the ever-changing Proposition HHH, Los Angeles has documented a long history of plans or budgets that have fallen short, year after year, as the homelessness crisis worsens."

Rob Wilcox, a spokesman for City Attorney Mike Feuer said the office was reviewing the ruling and has no further comment.

"The court goes well beyond what the plaintiffs have asked for. We're now evaluating our options, including the possibility of an appeal," said Skip Miller, partner at Miller Barondess, outside counsel for the county in the case. "The alliance motion is an attempt by property owners and businesses to rid their neighborhood of homeless people. There is no legal basis for an injunction because the county is spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on proven strategies that have produced measurable results throughout the region, not just on skid row. It's imperative we stay the course and not be distracted by apparent quick fixes, which will only make this complex societal problem even worse."

Plaintiff LA Alliance for Human Rights, which includes residents, property owners and business operators who live, work or own property in skid row, sued the city and county in March 2020. A stay was issued last year to give parties a chance to settle. The stay was lifted last week after the county filed a motion to be dismissed from the case. LA Alliance for Human Rights v. City of Los Angeles et al., 2:20-CV-2991 (C.D. Cal., filed March 10, 2020).

The city and county argued Article III of the U.S. Constitution prohibits a district court judge from controlling how municipal governments exercise discretionary decision-making or spending.

Carter wrote that the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of a constitutional and statutory rights violation in the matter, and,"the current state of the homelessness crisis in Los Angeles begs intervention." The judge also said that case law allows him broad equitable powers to remedy such violations by the city and county.

"A court may employ equitable powers as a means of enforcement to compel defendants to take certain steps to ensure compliance with constitutional mandates," Carter wrote, citing Brown v. Plata,563 U.S. 493, 538 (2011). "A district court is not bound by a plaintiff's prayer for relief and has broad discretion to determine a flexible remedy that balances the competing interests at stake."

The Brown decision held that courts can act even if rulings might have an impact on a local government's budgets, Carter wrote.

Carter ordered the defendants to provide housing for women and children by July 19, and for all families within 120 days. By Oct. 18, skid row's general population must be offered shelter, Carter wrote.

Garcetti's $1 billion fund must be placed in escrow, with funding streams to be reported to the judge within a week, Carter wrote. Funds from the state and federal governments must be audited, including from voter initiatives, and the American Rescue Plan and the CARES Act, he ordered. Carter also said he would require a report within a month on all potentially available land to build housing, as well as a status report on Project Roomkey.

Elizabeth Mitchell, who represents the plaintiffs with Matthew D. Umhofer of Spertus, Landes, & Umhofer LLP, said Carter's was legally supportable. "It's so significant, and such a bold order that's taking the first step in solving this crisis," Mitchell said.