L.A. City Council President Paul Krekorian is pushing back hard on a city-commissioned analysis that found a major homelessness enforcement policy championed by himself and other council members has been ineffective.
Following a Saturday evening statement from Krekorian, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) officials said they stand by their findings.
The LAHSA analysis was meant to feed into a broader report to the council about its 41.18 zones approach that is now eight months overdue. It was completed in November and delivered to the city’s legislative analyst, where it stalled and its info has not been provided to the full council.
LAist obtained a leaked copy of LAHSA’s analysis and published an article about the findings on Friday.
In the sharply-worded statement, Krekorian vigorously disputed LAHSA’s analysis and LAist’s coverage of it.
Krekorian disputed that the information was hidden from the public, alleging LAHSA’s November report had inaccuracies — and possibly “deliberately misleading” info — that still need to be sorted out.
“The information LAHSA provided…was clearly faulty and incomplete at best, and perhaps even deliberately misleading,” wrote Krekorian, who co-authored the 41.18 zone approach that was examined by LAHSA.
He said LAHSA hasn’t been responding to legitimate questions about it from the city’s legislative analyst — something LAHSA officials dispute.
“LAHSA has failed to respond to these basic questions,” Krekorian said, adding that the joint city-county agency “continues to dodge its responsibility to respond to the [legislative analyst]’s legitimate inquiries.”
It’s one of the city’s most controversial enforcement laws related to homelessness. Versions of the rule have been around for decades, but more recent changes to how it’s used have been fiercely debated, including among council members.
What’s happened since then? Nearly a year ago, council members ordered a report assessing what 41.18 was costing and whether it was working to bring people indoors and prevent encampments from coming back. That report was due in June, but still has not been released.
On Friday, LAist published a story about LAHSA's analysis of 41.18 zones, which was submitted to the city in November for the overdue council report. It showed 41.18 has failed to keep areas clear of encampments and get people housed.
LAHSA officials say that’s false, and disputed allegations that the report was faulty or deliberately misleading.
“LAHSA offered impartial analysis based on the available data. Our goal is always to provide honest assessments that will allow elected officials to make informed policy decisions,” said Paul Rubenstein, LAHSA’s head of external affairs, in a text message to LAist.
“LAHSA has responded to all questions to date from the [legislative analyst] regarding the report,” he added.
LAist asked Hugh Esten, Krekorian’s spokesperson, if he has any documentation supporting Krekorian’s allegations about LAHSA not responding to questions. Esten said he didn’t, and that he didn’t know if Krekorian did either.
Any such documents, Esten said, would be held by the legislative analyst, Sharon Tso. Tso didn’t return a text message Saturday requesting that info.
In an interview Friday evening, Tso said she had unanswered questions for LAHSA but declined to say what they were. LAist also has asked Rubenstein for documentation of questions being answered.
LAHSA is a joint city-county agency, and half of its governing commission is appointed by L.A.’s mayor and confirmed by the city council.
A spokesperson for L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who chairs L.A.’s governing commission and the Board of Supervisors, said no concerns about the LAHSA analysis were raised with the supervisor.
“No one brought this to the Supervisor’s attention — no one at LAHSA and no one on the Council,” said Horvath spokesperson Constance Farrell in a text message to LAist, when asked about the council legislative analyst’s alleged questions and concerns.
Tso declined to give a timeline for when her long-overdue city report would be completed and turned over to the full council and public.
“I am being diligent…That’s all I can tell you,” Tso said. She also declined to answer questions about any exchanges with council members about the underlying data or the report. “My conversations with my council members are my conversations.”
She said council members haven’t been demanding the information be disclosed immediately.
“There hasn’t been this screaming demand that we need to have something now,” Tso said.
LAist’s article Friday generated strong reactions around City Hall.
In a statement responding to the article, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez called 41.18 a "complete and total failure."
"Our office still has not officially received this report, but we know that encampments swept with 41.18 nearly always return, and we spend millions of dollars every year on this ineffective criminalization of homelessness," he said.
Rubenstein noted that LAHSA’s analysis acknowledged data quality issues around 41.18. The report says that’s largely because the council didn’t ask for data tracking for 41.18 zones when it created the policy back in 2021, under the motion Krekorian co-authored.
As for the 41.18 law, in his statement Krekorian objected to claims that it criminalizes homelessness, and said it’s “not an alternative to housing programs,” like Mayor Karen Bass’ Inside Safe initiative.
“It simply prohibits encampments in specified limited areas,” he said, “that are especially dangerous to the unhoused themselves, or that unreasonably impede the public’s use of the public right of way, or are adjacent to sensitive areas such as schools and child care centers.”
Krekorian, in his statement, specifically criticized the LAHSA report for saying an encampment had been repopulated even if one person returned. LAist is working on a deeper analysis of the data.
It’s unclear how long Krekorian has had the November report from LAHSA. Esten said he didn’t know, and LAist requested Saturday night that he ask the council president that question. An answer hadn’t been provided as of publication time Sunday afternoon.
Esten said it’s common in L.A. for report-backs ordered by the council to take much longer than their 60-day deadlines, and for there to be no public update about the delay.
A leading advocacy group for unhoused people has been calling for the report’s release for months. The full report-back to the council on 41.18’s effectiveness was due by mid-June. Multiple council members told LAist they have yet to receive LAHSA’s November analysis, which states that it “was performed as requested by the Los Angeles City Council” under its April 2023 directive for a 60-day report-back.
In October, the group LA Community Action Network filed a written comment with the council wondering why the report was taking so long.
On Wednesday, it again urged for the report to be published, both in a letter to the council and during public comments at the council meeting.
The 60-day report-back “is now 261 days past due,” wrote Pete White, LA CAN’s executive director, in the letter. He noted that, on average, six unhoused people die each day across L.A. County.
“It is imperative upon the LA City Council to recognize the urgency of this matter.”
LAist made a public record request for LAHSA's report and underlying data. LAHSA released both Sunday night. Here's the summary dated Nov. 28, 2023.
