Last Updated on August 22, 2022
In March of 2020 the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights (and others) filed a Complaint against the City and County of Los Angeles (and others) concerning the overwhelming number of Angelenos experiencing homelessness. The Complaint begins “People are perishing in the streets at a rate of three per day while the City and County of Los Angeles have tried but failed to stem this tide of human tragedy. The numbers alone are staggering. There are 58,936 homeless individuals in Los Angeles County (“County”) and 36,300 in the City of Los Angeles’ (“City”)—an increase of 12 percent and 16 percent from just the prior year’s count, respectively.”
Just over a year later, April of 2021, the plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction to compel certain actions (per Wikipedia, “An injunction is a… special court order that compels a party to do or refrain from specific acts”).
On April 20, 2021, the Court did indeed issue the injunction. In doing so it said “For decades in Los Angeles, the desperation of its citizens has been met with a yawn.” Among other things the Court ordered “Within no more than 90 days (i.e., on or before July 19, 2021), the City and County must offer and if accepted provide shelter or housing immediately to all unaccompanied women and children living in Skid Row; within 120 days (i.e., on or before August 18, 2021) to all families living in Skid Row; and within 180 days (i.e., on or before October 18, 2021) to the general population living in Skid Row.”
The defendants immediately filed a notice of appeal… in which they prevailed. The District Court continued to encourage the parties to reach a settlement agreement… which they accomplished in May-June of 2022. Based on the agreement the Court retains jurisdiction for five years.
To see the latest court documents on this case click here.
Click on each item below to expand (the most recent is at the top):
LA Alliance v City of LA - Document 460 - Quarterly Status Update - July 22, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 460 – Quarterly Status Update – July 22, 2022
A. Exhibit A is the Homeless Roadmap Quarterly Report, which summarizes the type of interventions being developed in each Council District, the number of beds provided in each intervention, the status of each project, and the number of unsheltered Angelenos from each of the three target populations placed in each intervention.
B. Exhibit B contains updated Council District Plans reflecting the current status of each Council District’s Interventions in Development to shelter people experiencing homelessness, and Possible Additional Interventions being contemplated for development.
C. Exhibit C is a report to City Council, dated May 20, 2022, which contains the Office of the City Administrative Officer’s funding recommendations for the City’s interventions.
D. Exhibit D is a report dated May 26, 2022, which contains the Office of the City Administrative Officer’s Amendments to the funding recommendations.
E. Exhibit E is a report dated May 26, 2022 from the Homelessness and Poverty Committee concerning the funding recommendations from the City Administrative Officer.
Read the documents: Cover, Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D, and Exhibit E.
LA Alliance v City of LA - Document 451 - Intervenors Appeal [Proposed Settlement Agreement] - July 13, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 451 – Intervenors Appeal [Proposed Settlement Agreement] – July 13, 2022
Intervenors Los Angeles Community Action Network and Los Angeles Catholic Worker appeal the District Court’s “signoff” on the settlement agreement with the City.
Read the document here.
LA Alliance v City of LA - Document 445 - Settlement Agreement Approved - June 14, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 445 – Settlement Agreement Approved – June 14, 2022
The District Court Judge approves the settlement agreement between the plaintiffs and the City of Los Angeles. The Court is to retain jurisdiction for five years.
Read the document here.
LA Alliance v City of LA - Document 434[-1] - Intervenors Objections to Stipulated Order of Dismissal [Proposed Settlement Agreement] - May 31, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 434[-1] – Intervenors Objections to Stipulated Order of Dismissal [Proposed Settlement Agreement] – May 31, 2022
Intervenors Los Angeles Community Action Network and Los Angeles Catholic Worker, for many reasons, objected to the settlement agreement.
LA Alliance v City of LA - Document 426-1 - Motion to Dismiss with Attached Proposed Settlement Agreement - May 24, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 426-1 – Motion to Dismiss with Attached Proposed Settlement Agreement – May 24, 2022
The parties filed a motion to dismiss with the settlement agreement attached. This agreement is with the City only.
Read the article here.
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 408-1 – Preliminary Settlement Agreement – April 1, 2022
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 408-1 – Preliminary Settlement Agreement – April 1, 2022
The parties filed a notice of preliminary settlement agreement with the details attached. This agreement is with the City only.
Read the article here.
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 352 – Court of Appeals Opinion – September 23, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 352 – Court of Appeals Opinion – September 23, 2021
Earlier this year the defendants appealed the District Court’s Preliminary Injunction to the 9th Circuit. The appellate court ruled “we VACATE the preliminary injunction order and REMAND” (send it back to the district court). It appears the parties went back to work in search of a settlement agreement.
Read the article here.
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 330 – State Funding Addressing Homelessness – May 29, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance v City of LA – Document 330 – State Funding Addressing Homelessness – May 29, 2021
This is a mishmash of city & state documents — audit overviews, etc. — suggesting a less than stellar performance by government responding to the crisis. As an example, one letter (page 21-22 of pdf) from Ron Galperin, [City of Los Angeles] Controller, discusses the slow progress and escalating costs of the use of Proposition HHH bond funds to develop up to 10,000 supportive housing units. Mr. Galperin says building cost estimates skyrocketed to $531,000 per unit today (2019). “The cost of building many of these units exceeds the median sale price of a market-rate condominium in the City of Los Angeles and a single-family home in Los Angeles County.” Well done!
Read the article here.
LA County/City say proposed court order to house Skid Row’s homeless won’t stand - April 20, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al. - Notice of Interlocutory Appeal - April 20, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al. – Notice of Interlocutory Appeal – April 20, 2021
The Notice of Interlocutory Appeal was filed later the same day….
L.A. ordered by judge to provide shelter for entire homeless population on Skid Row by fall - April 20, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
L.A. ordered by judge to provide shelter for entire homeless population on Skid Row by fall – April 20, 2021
A federal judge overseeing a sweeping lawsuit about homelessness in Los Angeles on Tuesday ordered the city and county to find shelter for all unhoused residents of Skid Row within 180 days and audit any spending related to the out-of-control crisis of people living on the streets.
In a fiery 110-page order, Judge David O. Carter slammed officials’ inability to restrain the unprecedented growth of homelessness that has seen encampments spread into nearly every neighborhood in the region.
Read the article here.
LA Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al. - Preliminary Injunction - April 20, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
LA Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al. – Preliminary Injunction – April 20, 2021
From the Conclusion of MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter:
For decades in Los Angeles, the desperation of its citizens has been met with a yawn. Each day, newspaper headlines bring forth different cities and communities calling for action. Meanwhile, politicians measure success by how much money they have raised to combat homelessness. Service providers with clipboards endlessly approach homeless individuals with services and promises to return, yet are unable to provide sufficient shelter or housing. Bureaucrats create statistics trumpeting their efficiency and success to the public. But none of this has led to accountability or solutions. As Councilmember Mark Ridley-Thomas remarked, “the issue of homelessness is of insufficient importance to the decision makers of this region. Therefore, we have this languishing set of circumstances where we chase our tails day in and day out claiming that we’re doing things.”
While this is a 110 page document the provisions of the preliminary injunction start on page 105. The entire court document can be found here.
Note — the appeal was filed the following day….
‘Extraordinary’ homelessness hearing held in LA’s Skid Row - February 4, 2021
Last Updated on August 22, 2022
‘Extraordinary’ homelessness hearing held in LA’s Skid Row – February 4, 2021
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A hearing in a lawsuit seeking solutions for the homelessness crisis in Los Angeles was held Thursday not in a courthouse or via webcam, but at a shelter in the heart of the city’s Skid Row, the notorious section of downtown where thousands of people live on the streets in perilous conditions.
U.S. District Judge David Carter presided from a folding table under a large tent in the parking lot outside Downtown Women’s Center, where encampments line the surrounding sidewalks. The hearing was occasionally interrupted by loud music, honking car horns or shouts from people listening just outside the center’s gate.
“This is an extraordinary hearing,” Carter said, acknowledging the setting but also the scope of the problem facing the court.
Read the article here.