Home / Insights / Homelessness
Homelessness
Agenda activity across eight LA County cities — Los Angeles, Long Beach, Glendale, Pomona, Redondo Beach, Culver City, Signal Hill, and Claremont — organizes into four main clusters: annual HUD federal grant approvals (CDBG, ESG, HOME) proceeding in Glendale, Long Beach, and Pomona; direct service contracting for shelters, outreach, and interim housing concentrated in Long Beach and Los Angeles; enforcement and public-space management through sitting/lying/sleeping designation resolutions in multiple Los Angeles council districts and a new camping ordinance in Pomona; and system governance reform in Los Angeles, where the Housing and Homelessness Committee generated multiple reports on LAHSA accountability, invoice processing backlogs, and a Revised Asset Evaluation Framework.
Long Beach is the highest-spending jurisdiction in the dataset, combining roughly $5M in Measure A Local Solutions Fund acceptance, $3.9M in Measure A year-two grants, a $9.6M multi-provider services contract bundle, and $6.3M in PATH shelter operations contracts — alongside a $265,000 Homelessness Strategic Plan Update contract and a new Cal State Long Beach mobile access center partnership. Los Angeles operates at larger scale: $29.7M in Prisma Apartments supportive housing financing, multiple Hope the Mission lease expansions for interim housing sites in CD 2, CD 6, and CD 13, and a $2.5M tax-exempt revenue note for a separate supportive housing project. Smaller cities show a sharp contrast: Redondo Beach's largest direct expenditure is $150,705 in CDBG appropriations; Signal Hill's most prominent item is a proclamation honoring its homeless services liaison; and Culver City's activity consists primarily of status update presentations on Safe Parking LA and Project Homekey under a declared local emergency.
Enforcement activity has accelerated in Los Angeles, with council-district designation resolutions for sitting/lying/sleeping enforcement appearing repeatedly from March through June 2026 across CDs 6, 9, 10, 11, and 13 — a recurring pattern that represents the most frequent single homelessness-related action type in the dataset. Pomona moved from ordinance introduction in April to adoption in May 2026, while Glendale took a prevention-first posture, approving a tiered prioritization strategy using HOME and Homeless Services funds as temporary displacement subsidies. An inter-governmental dimension is also visible: Redondo Beach formally opposed a County Board of Supervisors motion on homelessness governance restructuring, and Los Angeles adopted legislative positions on multiple state bills addressing youth homelessness (AB 1899), state HCD data requirements (AB 1924), and HHAP grant prioritization (AB 1708).
What to watch AI-generated
Key items (8)
- [41] Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to amend Contract No. 37602 with the Los Angeles County Chief Executive Office, to accept and expend second year funding in the amount of $5,023,735, for an updated contract amount not to exceed $9,889,433, for the Measure A: Local Solutions Fund from November 18, 2025 through June 30, 2031 at the discretion of the City Manager; and Increase appropriations in the Health Fund Group in the Health and Human Services Department by $5,023,735, offset by grant revenues. — Long Beach, 2026-06-16 · Largest near-term appropriation in the dataset — $5M Measure A Local Solutions Fund acceptance scheduled for the June 16 vote, illustrating the scale of county-to-city homelessness funding flows
- [30] Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFP HSB-2026-002 and award contracts to 1736 Family Crisis Center, of Los Angeles, CA; Catholic Charities of Los Angeles, Inc.; Goodwill, Southern Los Angele — Long Beach, 2026-05-12 · $9.6M multi-provider services contract bundle (1736 Family Crisis Center, Catholic Charities, Goodwill) anchors Long Beach's direct-service spending and demonstrates breadth of provider network
- [8] CD 13 HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE REPORT and RESOLUTION relative to adopting the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) Resolution and Minutes; and issuing a supplemental tax-exempt multifamily housing conduit revenue note in an amount up to $29,739,488; and executing related financing documents for the Prisma Apartments Supportive Housing Project located at 6914 West De Longpre Avenue and 1350-1358 North Orange Drive in Council District 13. — Los Angeles, 2026-03-11 · $29.7M financing for Prisma Apartments supportive housing in CD 13 is the largest single project-level expenditure in the dataset, reflecting LA's Prop HHH pipeline still moving
- [2b] City Council Motion to approve FY 2026-27 CDBG, ESG, and HOME Annual Action Plan totaling $3,210,581; authorize the submission of the Annual Action Plan to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as recommended by the CDBG Advisory Committee and Continuum of Care (CoC) Board; and authorize the City Manager or a designee, to redirect excess, cancelled or unused program funds under $50,000 from one project to another with CDBG Advisory Committee approval — Glendale, 2026-06-02 · $3.21M HUD action plan approval anchors the federal grant cycle theme shared by Glendale, Long Beach, and Pomona — the most geographically consistent activity across smaller cities
- [26-1339] Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance Relating to Camping and Storing Personal Property on Public Property It is recommended that the City Council adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 4369 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 46 (“STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES”), ARTICLE XII (“CAMPING, SLEEPING OR STORAGE OF PROPERTY”), SECTIONS 46-601 - 46-606 OF THE POMONA CITY CODE AND ADDING SECTIONS 46-607 - 46-611 RELATING TO CAMPING AND STORING PERSONAL PROPERTY ON PUBLIC PROPERTY — Pomona, 2026-05-04 · Adoption of the camping and storing personal property ordinance represents the clearest enforcement trend among non-LA cities, moving from introduction to final adoption within two weeks
- [27] STATUTORY EXEMPTION, COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER and BUREAU OF ENGINEERING relative to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-27 Annual Homelessness Funding Report. — Los Angeles, 2026-05-26 · FY 2026-27 Annual Homelessness Funding Report to the full council provides the system-level spending overview that contextualizes LA's many individual contracts and resolutions
- [12] HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) and the City Administrative Officer (CAO), with the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) and HR&A Advisors, to report on the progress of transitioning households in the Time Limited Subsidy program with expiring funding into permanent housing, and related matters. — Los Angeles, 2026-04-29 · LAHSA reform and progress report — paired with items on contract management accountability and invoice backlog — signals institutional concern about whether large expenditures are being administered effectively
- [26-0608] AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO OPPOSE A BOARD MOTION REGARDING A MORE ACCOUNTABLE HOMELESSNESS GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY INTRODUCED BY SUPERVISOR LINDSEY HORVATH — Redondo Beach, 2026-05-12 · Opposition to the County Board motion on homelessness governance accountability illustrates inter-governmental tension over who controls homelessness policy, a dynamic absent from other cities' agendas
- Coverage is 10 of LA County's 88 cities today, expanding across the county — not yet a full regional census.
- We compare shares of council attention (% of substantive items), not raw counts, so a small city and a large one compare fairly. Procedural boilerplate (minutes, warrants, proclamations, appointments, presentations) is stripped first.
- Dollars are $ on items naming an amount, deduped to one figure per item — not verified award totals. "—" means no amount was extracted, never that $0 was spent.
- The ingested window differs by city, so totals aren't over identical periods.
How cities compare on homelessness
Share of each city's council attention going to this topic (substantive items), and dollars per resident where amounts were extracted. We don't rank by raw counts.
| City | Attention share | $ (items) | $ / resident |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pomona |
3% |
$2.2M | $14.80 |
| Los Angeles |
3% |
$32.2M | $8.44 |
| Long Beach |
2% |
$57.7M | $123.54 |
| Glendale |
2% |
$12.8M | $65.34 |
| Signal Hill |
1% |
— | — |
| Redondo Beach |
1% |
$157K | $2.19 |
| Culver City |
0% |
— | — |
| Calabasas |
0% |
— | — |
| Claremont |
0% |
— | — |
| Sierra Madre |
0% |
— | — |
Named decisions on this topic
Biggest dollars
Contested votes
Vote records are partial — captured only where a city publishes minutes or an official council journal (chiefly Long Beach and Los Angeles); this is not a cross-city contestedness comparison.
Flagged for review (5)
Recovered from PDF/scanned sources; titles not fully verified. Shown for transparency.