Los Angeles County voters will soon decide whether to approve a sales tax increase that would help fund beds for unhoused people. It’s a potentially critical ballot measure in a county that has seen record homelessness in recent years, and if passed could provide ongoing funding for services and shelter.
The measure is supported by a coalition including public health and homelessness advocates and labor unions, while some business and taxpayer advocates are opposed. It comes amid scrutiny of LA’s current efforts to provide for homeless people.
Measure A is on LA County’s November’s ballot. If approved, it would increase an existing homelessness-dedicated sales tax of a quarter-penny per dollar up to a half penny. So for example, if you spent $10,000 a year on goods like groceries, clothes and electronics, you would pay a total of $50 for the tax at the proposed new rate—up from a total of $25 as it presently stands.
“It will make an enormous impact,” though “it’s certainly not the full level of resources that are necessary to end homelessness in Los Angeles.”
The original sales tax was approved by county voters in 2017, as Measure H. County officials estimate that because of the quarter-penny sales tax, 42,000 people have moved into permanent housing and 80,500 people into temporary housing. The measure has also helped fund case management services. Over nine out of ten people who received permanent supportive housing (92 percent) reportedly stayed housed for one year, and 85 percent stayed housed for two years.
But Measure H is set to expire in 2027 if it isn’t replaced. The county executive office recently sought to illustrate the kind of impact that could have.
“If all Measure H funded interim housing and housing subsidies lost their funding today, unsheltered homelessness could increase 28% based on the 2024 [homelessness count],” it stated. “This is based on the number of Measure H funded interim housing beds and housing subsidies which support over 14,500 individuals and families. With the loss of these beds and subsidies we could expect that anyone using these resources would likely fall into homelessness.”
The summary of Measure A states it would generate $1 billion each year to help address the homelessness crisis.
“It will make an enormous impact,” Donald Whitehead Jr, executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, told Filter of Measure A. He compared it to similar measures approved in Cincinnati, Ohio and other cities around the country, saying that these have resulted in an increase in affordable housing and people no longer having to live on the streets.
“It’s certainly not the full level of resources that are necessary to end homelessness in Los Angeles,” he cautioned. “The city has one of the highest homeless populations in the country. It won’t solve it, but it will do what’s most important to protect the lives of people who have mental health and other issues. They need to be off the streets and this will get us a long way there.”
Measure A’s adoption is not guaranteed, however. The latest poll of likely voters in the county found 49 percent in favor—just shy of the outright majority required for it to pass—with 33 percent opposed and 17 percent undecided.
Measure A—which would replace Measure H, and which would last indefinitely, unlike its predecessor—would also expand the uses of the money generated. Funds could pay for the construction of new affordable homes, in addition to shelters and supportive services. One out of three dollars raised would be dedicated to the LA County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency, which provides housing and support for people at risk of homelessness through eviction and foreclosure, while the remainder would go to direct homelessness support.
The ballot question comes at a moment when the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority is facing mounting criticism and legal scrutiny.
The measure would create two councils to be responsible for keeping track of how the money is used: an “executive committee” including elected officials and their representatives, and a “leadership council” including different experts on homelessness.
The ballot question comes at a moment when the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority is facing mounting criticism and legal scrutiny. A group representing unhoused residents is suing the city and county, and a federal judge ordered an audit of how homelessness funding is being spent. At a status hearing in August, the federal judge overseeing the case criticized the city agency for not having records of services provided, stating, “If there isn’t documentation of the work being done, it’s not being done. That can be our only conclusion.”
“I would say this is not a wide-ranging issue,” Whitehead said when asked how common it is for such agencies to have financial transparency issues. “In any profession there will be organizations that don’t meet [the right] standards. But we have not seen that [nationwide]. Most organizations don’t have enough money. What is important is that the funds are accountable, but also [that] there is accountability to the level of service.”
Homelessness is sure to be on the minds of California voters beyond LA County. According to a CalMatters analysis, nearly 186,000 people in the state were either living on the streets or in shelters as of January. It’s an increase from 2023, though the year-on-year rise appears to be slowing. The numbers are open to question, however, when only 32 of 58 counties reported data, and each may use different counting methods.
Governor Gavin Newsom (D) is taking a carrot-and-stick approach—incentivizing local governments to build more shelter and housing, while also encouraging them to raid and clear people from encampments. On October 4, Newsom’s office announced it was making $131 million in grants available to local jurisdictions to do both.
“Newsom has fallen into the trap of creating solutions that feed the symptoms of homelessness versus the structural issues.”
Newsom’s office claimed this “encampment resolution” program has transitioned about 21,000 people out of homelessness. It has also implemented a stricter accountability measure behind the funding, with warnings of legal enforcement and funds being withheld for any agencies that fail to comply with fair housing and homelessness laws.
“Newsom has fallen into the trap of creating solutions that feed the symptoms of homelessness versus the structural issues,” Whitehead said. “There is a huge danger in ‘encampment resolution’ without a proper destination.”
Newsom’s policies are being challenged by at least one jurisdiction. The state is currently threatening legal action against the city of Norwalk in Los Angeles County. In August, Norwalk passed a temporary ban on building any new emergency shelters, supportive or transitional housing. Newsom’s office responded by describing the city’s ban as illegal, and revoked the city’s compliance with its housing element law. It means the city cannot stop any new affordable housing construction, and it cannot receive any state homelessness funding. The state claims the city essentially took $29 million but has failed to build the affordable housing it promised.
Californians have already weighed in on homelessess-related measures in 2024. In March, state voters approved Proposition 1, a plan to build more mental health and treatment inpatient beds; some harm reduction advocates opposed it, on the grounds that it would promote coerced treatment. That same month, San Francisco voters approved a measure to require drug testing for people receiving county welfare benefits, with a requirement that they receive treatment if they test positive, which harm reduction advocates also condemned.
“You haven’t heard the word mentioned in the presidential debates.”
In November, California voters will additionally decide on Proposition 36, which would essentially force people facing a felony drug charge into treatment if they’re to avoid time in prison.
As this flurry of political activity around homelessness and drug use continues in California, Whitehead wants to see politicians there and nationwide take a braver stand on the homelessness crisis and housing access.
“Homelessness is not part of any political discourse,” he said. “You haven’t heard the word mentioned in the presidential debates or [agendas]. You hear about housing but you don’t hear many politicians talk about homelessness unless it’s connected to crime, and they use it as a scapegoat. We have seen dramatic increases and we have to deal with structural issues.”
Photograph of an improvised shelter in LA by Gilbert Mercier via Flickr/Creative Commons 2.0