Suppose you spend billions on a problem, and it gets twice as bad? Welcome to homelessness in Los Angeles . . .

Chart above - I blame drugs for the doubling of homelessness in Los Angeles. And mental illness. And probably government ineptitude . . .

Apparently nobody can say for sure how much money is being spent to help the homeless. Or where it’s going. Today's headline (link below) is the possible eradication of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. It spends $2.4 billion a year. On 73,000 homeless people. That’s $30,000 a year per person. For a tent, and an EBT card, and . . . ?

Los Angeles might not be the worst in the nation, though. In New York, some audits suggest the city is spending $50,000 per homeless person each year. Of course, those lucky souls live in hotel rooms provided by the government. In Los Angeles the solution is apparently tents lining the sidewalks in posh shopping districts, in parks, at the beach, and in front of city hall. $30,000 would buy a LOT of tents, meals at KFC and Wendy’s (which accept homeless EBT meal cards). And controlled substances. That’s a lure some people might find irresistible.

The head of the LAHSA is a woman named Va Lecia Adams Kellum. She’s an “ally” of Mayor Karen Bass, and earns $430,000 a year. That’s not as bad as the LA “water chief” who earns $750,000 and is complicit in the $150 billion fire. But still . . .

Wait, it gets worse Ms. Adams-Kellum was caught last month trying to funnel over $2 billion in city contracts to her husband’s company, Upward Bound House. State law prohibits government officials from authorizing spending in which they or their families have a stake. Ms. Adams-Kellum has described the multi-billion-dollar deal with her husband as “an oversight”. Stop laughing. All of this is really true. See the link at bottom.

As of this morning, Ms. Adams-Kellum is still on the job, drawing her $430,000 salary. So is the $750,000 a year water chief, Janisse Quinones. She drained the reservoir in the middle of peak fire season. There have been no charges, no arrests. The Los Angeles District Attorney is George Gascon, another known associate of Mayor Karen Bass. He earns $400,000 a year . . .

Why did homelessness double in Los Angeles? It would be ludicrous to claim this was the goal all along. Like most malfeasance, helping the homeless probably started with good intentions. But when you give money away . . . or food, or narcotics, or tents and space to pitch them. . . people are going to show up. It just works that way. Like a backyard barbecue. If you grilled it, they will come.

I have zero confidence that if LA Mayor Karen Bass takes control of that $2 billion in misspent homeless money, and appoints another crony handle things, that this will get better. At the very least, as a lifelong “community activist” Mayor Bass is out of her depth. As her lavishly paid direct reports apparently are. Or possibly this is a massive case of cronyism and corruption. If Mayor Bass wanted to funnel money to her friends, she should have set up something where they get paid for NFT artwork. That’s less obvious, and it wouldn't burn down the city, or attract drug addled vagrants.

I’m just sayin’ . . .

Los Angeles moves to take control of homelessness agency, citing audits that found reckless spending

L.A. City Audit Uncovers $2.4 Billion in Untracked Homelessness Spending - LAmag

LAHSA CEO Signed $2.1 Million in Contracts with Her Husband’s Employer. Agency Calls it an ‘Oversight.’ | California County News

ArishMell · 70-79, M

I don't know California's geography, so this may be a different area of the State.

Last year a documentary on BBC Radio Four revealed an unexpected further homelessness problam - in of all places, "Silicon Valley", and of people working in the big IT firms.

They are attracted there by the high salaries but housing is scarce and even costlier. The programme was at pains to say most were not living under railway-bridges, but instead lived in vans, some in tents, or begged living-room floor space with colleagues. A handful were found sleeping on the all-night local buses!

So classed as homeless but not totally on the streets, nor from illness or drug addiction.

A somewhat similar situation exists in London, also among people on professional salaries (e.g. teachers, nurses) but unable to afford even a tiny flat. These too are not on the streets but instead lodging with friends or still with their parents.

The definition of "homeless" in both cases being "unable to afford own home to buy or rent."

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F

@ArishMell thank you for your reply. i've read similar articles. in fact, the city government of San Francisco is renting RVs for the homeless . . . but they're getting ripped off. $5,000 for an RV which is permanently parked.

the most common "unhoused" (different than homeless) scenario in california is the Amazon worker who lives in their pickup truck camper in the warehouse parking lot. Amazon was at the forefront of recognizing the affordability crisis, and was one of the first to pioneer this solution. They can't afford to pay $50 an hour to someone to be a warehouse picker, but it's not costing them anything to let workers live in their trucks.

the majority of the public angst comes from tent takeovers of public spaces: sidewalks in shopping districts, pacific beaches, upscale suburbia full of mini-mansions.

people - in general, not just progressives - seem to be okay with homelessness provided they don't have to see it. But when they do see it, they start calling their elected officials and police to have eyesores removed.

Governor Gavin Newsom is starting to accommodate them, as part of his 2028 presidential campaign aspirations.

ArishMell · 70-79, M

@SusanInFlorida Thankyou for the explanations.

A very good point that - it's fine while out of sight.