Committee advances bill shielding volunteers and nonprofits who provide survival services to unhoused people

SB 634, the Unhoused Service Providers Protection Act, was presented to the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee by Senator Perez. The bill would prohibit local and state government entities from adopting or enforcing ordinances that prohibit a person or organization from providing basic survival services or resources—such as food, water, blankets and hygiene supplies—to an unhoused person.

Perez said the bill responds to a rising trend in some jurisdictions to criminalize volunteers and nonprofits that provide humanitarian aid. She cited recent examples raised in the hearing record: a Fremont ordinance that included language risking criminal liability for aid providers (later retroactively altered after public outcry), arrests in El Cajon of volunteers distributing food and clothing, and prosecution of a Santa Ana church‑based nonprofit, Micah's Way. "The adoption of ordinances applying punitive fines and jail time towards unhoused service providers will not help the unhoused crisis, but exacerbate it," Perez said.

Multiple witnesses with lived experience and service organizations urged the committee to protect providers. Sean Pleasance, co‑chair of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s lived experience advisory board, and Alex Vasosky, senior California policy fellow with the National Alliance to End Homelessness, testified that criminalization breaks vital links between unhoused people and services, prolongs episodes of homelessness and increases barriers to housing. Vasosky cited a study finding fines and tickets can prolong an episode of homelessness by nearly two years when controlling for other factors. A person with lived experience described losing all belongings during a street sweep, accruing a $900 citation that led to a warrant and three days in jail, and later nearly losing an apartment because the citation appeared in a background check.

Cities and counties representing some jurisdictions testified in opposition or respectful opposition. Kobi Pizzati (representing Beaumont, Corona and Thousand Oaks) and Nicole Wertleman (speaking for the Orange County Board of Supervisors and San Bernardino County) said local governments need tools to protect public health and safety and to manage parks and public spaces; the city of Corona’s written opposition argued the bill could limit enforcement for unauthorized camping and impede local nuisance abatement.

Committee members debated the balance between preserving humanitarian aid and maintaining local authority to address public health and safety. Several members said they supported the bill’s intent to protect volunteers and service providers; some asked for clear statutory definitions of the services covered by the protection (food, water, clothing, hygiene supplies, immediate health items) to avoid unintended consequences in areas like syringe‑exchange programs. The author and witnesses noted syringe exchange programs are already expressly protected under California public‑health law, and that SB 634 was narrowed in drafting to focus on service providers rather than broadly prohibiting local enforcement on encampments.

The committee moved SB 634 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The motion was made by Assemblymember Lee and seconded by Assemblymember Quirk Silva. The recorded vote was: Haney (aye); Patterson (no); Avila Farias (aye); Colosa (aye); Garcia (aye); Cholera (aye); Lee (aye); Cork Silva (no); Wicks (aye); Wilson (aye). Tally: 8 yes, 2 no. Sponsors and cosponsors listed in the record included California Housing Partnership, Disability Rights California (cosponsor), Housing California, ACLU CA Action, Inner City Law Center and other housing and advocacy organizations.

Supporters asked the committee and staff to clarify statutory definitions and ensure the bill explicitly protects providers who deliver food, water, clothing and other immediate survival items. Opponents asked for language to preserve local authority to address public health and nuisance issues. The author said she would work with interested local jurisdictions; the committee advanced the bill to appropriations for further consideration of scope and implementation.