Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Measure A Allocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee endorses city comments on Measure A local-solutions funding formula; urges data and safeguards
Summary
The Homelessness Strategies Committee reviewed and endorsed city recommendations to the county on allocation methods for Measure A's local-solutions fund, urged stronger data collection and transparency, and recommended delaying incentive components until the county refines program details.
The Los Angeles City Council's Homelessness Strategies Committee reviewed the city's proposed response to the county's draft allocation methodologies for Measure A's ‘‘local solutions’’ fund and agreed to send formal comments asking for a methodology that prioritizes residents in need and stronger data reporting.
Committee members and city staff told the meeting the city's recommended approach favors the methodology they labeled as Alternative 1 (an average of recent years) rather than formulas that would shift funds to jurisdictions with larger fiscal bases. City Administrative staff said the two-year average avoids distortions introduced by the COVID era and that some offices prefer a three-year average to smooth volatility, but cautioned a longer averaging period could reintroduce anomalies.
Why it matters: Measure A creates a new, sizable funding stream for homelessness responses across Los Angeles County. Committee members said the allocation formula will shape which jurisdictions receive money and whether funds support local programs meant to house people where they live. Committee members repeatedly raised the risk that poorly designed formulas could incentivize jurisdictions to relocate people rather than serve them locally.
City recommendations and concerns presented to the committee included: - Endorsing an allocation methodology that uses a recent multi-year average but avoids COVID-era distortions. - Asking the county not to allocate a significant portion of the local-solutions pool to an unstaffed incentive program in the fund's first year; instead, develop incentives after the program is operational. - Including a floor so that local jurisdictions receive a minimum share and urging the county to add funding (not reassign the 15% local-solutions share) if it wants to create incentives. - Requiring the county to publish accessible data on origin of shelter entrants and other metrics so cities can track whether county spending aligns with the program's goals.
City staff said the county requested feedback within a tight timeline and that the city can prepare a resolution and forward comments quickly. Committee members pressed staff to identify which data the county will provide and to push for monthly data updates rather than quarterly reporting.
Committee members also discussed the interaction between Measure A and existing measures such as Measure H and existing county funding streams. Several members said Measure A opens a new pool that must be coordinated with other programs so the city does not lose service capacity while paying for new shelter beds.
The committee voted to note and file the briefing items related to the Measure A allocation discussion and authorized staff to transmit the city's recommended comments to the county.
