A 2.5-hour City Council study session on June 9 delved into the persistent challenge of homelessness, culminating in unanimous approval of a Coordinated Response Framework (CRF) to unify services and address chronic service refusers. Acting Director Christine Safriet, community partners, residents, and council members engaged in a candid dialogue, discussing successes like 367 permanent housing placements since 2017 while confronting gaps in coordination and mental health support. The session reaffirmed a commitment to compassion, equity, and accountability, particularly for LGBTQ+ youth and trans individuals.
Safriet opened with an assessment: since the 2016 Homeless Initiative, the city has placed 367 individuals in permanent housing, tripling from 24 in 2017 to 72 in 2024, and secured 134 interim placements last year. Programs like Healthcare in Action’s street medicine (12 hours/day), the Care Team’s 24/7 response (2,700+ calls in 2025), and the forthcoming Holloway Interim Housing (20 pet-friendly units) reflect a Care First model. Yet, regional strains—70% homelessness rise since 2015, 36% shelter access, nine-month housing waits—exacerbate local challenges. “Community members are voicing growing concern that the city’s response… may no longer be sufficient,” Safriet said.
The CRF proposes a Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) to integrate providers, public safety, and county agencies. Sheriff’s Acting Captain Fanny Lapkin endorsed collaboration: “We’ve been working in silos, so I think working together is going to be a way to approach this new way of dealing with the homelessness.” Block by Block’s Erica Leon highlighted ambassadors’ daily bonds: “Our teams have done a really great job of creating those relationships.” Trans Latina Coalition VP/COO Maria Roman, once unhoused, praised peer-led services: “I’m an example of what it’s like to be given an opportunity and… grow with it.” Izaiah Cloquette, a former LA LGBT Center client, credited youth programs: “The only way I was able to attain [my title] was through the LA LGBT Center’s supportive services.”
Despite successes, there were incidents of fragmented communication and unclear follow-up for service refusers. Five case scenarios—chronic refusers, vehicle dwellers, public space occupants, uncoordinated outreach, and substance use—illustrated gaps. Safriet noted high-acuity needs (mental illness, substance use) strain providers, compounded by county deficits: only 36% access shelters, and affordable housing lags by 500,000 units. New state tools—SB 43 (expanding 5150 holds, effective 2026), Care Court, and Proposition 1’s funding—offer promise but demand local coordination.
Councilmember John M. Erickson questioned provider visibility: “People don’t believe what they don’t see anymore.” Safriet confirmed Care Team and Healthcare in Action now wear uniforms. Erickson probed enforcement limits, with Francisco Gomez explaining SB 43’s expanded 5150 eligibility awaits county implementation. Lapkin clarified deputies’ constraints: “We cannot arrest them” for minor infractions without victim cooperation, and arrests often lead to quick releases. The city spends ~$4 million annually on services, plus ~$500,000 for the Sheriff’s Mental Evaluation Team (MET), with Holloway set to increase costs.
Councilmember Danny Hang said, “Our current system isn’t working.” He asked how the MDT approach would addresses chronic refusers. Safriet explained weekly case reviews to track contacts and explore public safety responses if needed. Lauren Meister sought CRF timelines, concerned about mental health cases: “It will not work for those serious cases.” She proposed a shared database with Beverly Hills, noting cross-border movement. Staff confirmed Beverly Hills’ MDT model informs CRF, with timelines to be developed post-approval.
Vice Mayor John Heilman said, “There are problems and gaps that we need to address.” He cited persistent bus shelter occupants, alleging staff resisted law enforcement coordination: “In my experience, that’s not been true.” Heilman urged local shelter data, removing services from the library, and revising policies given county failures: “I don’t think we can count on the county.” Mayor Chelsea L. Byers celebrated the city’s safety net: “That is West Hollywood… a statement of our values.” She opposed jails, supported case conferencing, and suggested micro-grants for innovation, noting nine-month shelter waits.
Public comments enriched the debate. Nick Renteria praised the Holloway Interim Housing Program and urged volunteer programs: “Stigma remains high… I think we could create formal volunteer opportunities.” Kelly Pilarski humanized outreach: “The best thing to do is to say hello to them and ask them their name.” Michael Cautillo demanded accountability: “Coordination without accountability is not progress—it’s bureaucracy.” Victor Omelczenko advocated local permanent supportive housing (PSH): “West Hollywood should consider establishing PSH projects within our city limits.” Karen Eyres cautioned that streamlining outreach too much could miss trans needs, while Sam Borelli, who works in affordable housing, lauded 22 housing placements between October of last year through March of this year, but urged coordination, saying “I hope that this impact becomes real with creating this team.”
The council approved CRF, requesting a 90-day implementation plan with timelines and directing the subcommittee to address chronic refusers. The session balanced hope and critique, positioning CRF to unify efforts amid a regional crisis. As Byers noted, the city’s values shine, but persistent challenges demand sustained action.
Most of the degraded people who line our streets should be housed in mental facilities. The rest should go back to jail.
It’s time to stop pretending they are “unhoused residents” and deal with the problem.
Bingo. But common sense never prevails in CA……and certainly not in the silliest city in the country.
“Our current system isn’t working.” What a genius! It’s only been 15 years that it hasn’t worked.
What’s needed are Housing First programs, which prioritize immediate access to stable housing, have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing homelessness, improving housing stability, and enhancing overall well-being. Compared to traditional treatment-first approaches, Housing First programs have shown significantly better outcomes, including increased housing retention, decreased hospitalization and emergency room visits, and improved quality of life.
“reworked”???? Are you joking? The only solution is to make it illegal and arrest them. Put them in facilities.
Criminalizing poverty has never been a good idea. The landmark Supreme Court case Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962) established that it is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment to punish someone for a status or condition, rather than for specific criminal behavior.
It’s all about mental health and addiction. The city should be working with the county and the state to change laws to make it easier to place people into rehabilitation and or mental health facilities. All the money that’s going into housing- a large portion of it -should be funneled into building new rehabilitation and mental health facilities. You cannot place a person that has mental health or addiction problems into housing because they’re wind up right back on the street. They must address the issues that landed them on the street in the first place. If you put them… Read more »
Studies suggest that your information is incorrect.
Lack of affordable housing is a big reason.
They’re building temp housing with wrap around services.
Would rather have housing built than rehab centers. Really.
Kill two birds.
Lack of affordable housing for people who refuse to work? They couldn’t pay for housing if it cost $50.00 per month.