[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6477882,"mediaKeyId","5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580","parentId",5711125,"title","Public commenters criticize Care Plus and outreach programs; raise concerns about criminalization and homelessness services","audioSeconds",1215,"startMs",1476000,"endMs",2691000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580&start=1476&end=2691","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580/thumbnail_1476000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6477882/California/Public-commenters-criticize-Care-Plus-and-outreach-programs-raise-concerns-about-criminalization-and-homelessness-services","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477882-19ea5146b086bf96f7f936785e529da8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170236&Signature=LTD6tEjAz9ejeQ08mIhxtPLOaXt0hsqbXuia0BS2KbQ2ADGbpfHHxsniC4awK4n7CPAHhvkGuwXsllBsSwzSq~h7PmjZ~uaGc-9i3ZZ7eZ1op9UcpriLuPpI6ZiOGafQjw0DpFXYgXvbU1vsWWW5OUxMmMiFutmmfXSKXx7BVbmRB58JSRSEkaYAdwHF9kMyKzI6onGiuvrmdI4brf~5rh6MRfzjkx~n~~B~iZk7KuCHowoQ~g6oGTbaPjsdZUNAHki4X29tMl8f9x7p1~E2NyNlLPF35P6IqRC05APyt488pEJ-hC825bLTPj5kCXDwKGeb1DRcXzfAxS-imFIAHA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Los Angeles City","date","2025-09-03T06:04:05Z","article","Speakers at the Los Angeles City Council meeting criticized how some outreach programs operate and raised broader concerns about homelessness responses and policing-related permits and appointments.

A Spanish-speaking commenter who addressed multiple agenda items said Care Plus “es otro mecanismo para los repasos, no le están dando servicio, solamente están criminalizando la falta de vivienda” (Care Plus is another mechanism for sweepings; they’re not providing services, they are only criminalizing homelessness). The commenter also said the city’s approach displaces unhoused people and described “7 personas sin vivienda están muriendo en las calles de Los Ángeles por día,” a figure stated by the speaker during public comment.

Other public commenters linked homelessness outreach and navigation programs to service gaps rather than holistic housing outcomes. One speaker described item 28 as funding for outreach and navigation services for housing in District 12 and said such funds are intended to help people “navegar los sistemas de alojamiento que existen en el Registro de Alojamiento Económico para Los Ángeles.”

Police permits and appointments: multiple speakers raised concerns about police-related permits and commission appointments. One commenter asked questions about agenda item 20 and the appointment of Mary Lee to the police commission, saying the process appeared confusing to the public. Public commenters also criticized the presence of police and asked the council for different approaches to public safety.

Council action: items addressing homelessness outreach and Care Plus (items 27–29 and 28 for navigation services) and the related items were included in the grouped consent vote the council adopted later in the meeting; the clerk announced a tally of 14 in favor for the code block that included these items.

Why it matters: public commenters framed Care Plus and similar programs as enforcement-first responses that displace people experiencing homelessness. Speakers requested that councilmembers ensure outreach funding connects people to stable housing and does not produce repeat sweeps or loss of belongings.

Ending: The transcript excerpt records public concern about program design and appointments; the council’s docket and staff reports will list the program descriptions, funding amounts and departmental responsibilities for the adopted items.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting SAP - 9/2/25","oneSentenceSummary","Several public speakers criticized Care Plus and other outreach programs, saying they displace people experiencing homelessness rather than connect them to services. Speakers also raised questions about police-related permit fees and appointments; council adopted related agenda items as part of the consent bundle.","taxTitle","Spanish, Los Angeles City, Los Angeles County, California","taxId",80599,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6477886,"Downtown residents press council for recovery funding and tree canopy investments; items 32 and 33 approved",609,2040000,2649000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580&start=2040&end=2649","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580/thumbnail_2040000.jpg","/articles/6477886/California/Downtown-residents-press-council-for-recovery-funding-and-tree-canopy-investments-items-32-and-33-approved","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477886-bc55403ec64c95b1121ff84cdd20969c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170236&Signature=cafjT76KzNCFjJ55GrkYJGAGM3qpggKjB4qHzbmHz5NV3w4suHgD23blgV9jxMcOfXhd6acLyo9j8ApFrF8gt2ym81Q6lYgBh7R3~umpSHtjrfHwL2znF6Q2Qr9wigBaaG6BvVfFQWDHnNLujCIL0SUz5L843ldj2cOrZUA~ABkP9g-lroOXBuNQv9UDQKoHdT8wf-UnMDl9fQg1jp49NM7knUHPkZKEbpMXAYm9GkIrFsQi-bIz5IaTU2Ka3pxZtKQ1F8ymX-mvt5Cx-fqMK9275MQr61I1vlXZitxTpMyk9dLVQFzOR-L~-ZqhkQNrzKFY~eAz-8puvvYe1EJCbA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Downtown residents and business advocates urged the Los Angeles City Council to approve funding and programs aimed at downtown recovery and tree canopy improvements, saying investments are needed to support businesses, public safety and neighborhood livability.

“My name is Cassie Horton and I’m here with about 20 citizens who live downtown,” said Cassie Horton, asking the council to support agenda items 32 and 33. “Los Angeles center needs investment — not just for the center but for all of Los Angeles, especially considering the amount of taxes we generate.”

Deborah Schraud, a South Park resident, told the council the downtown neighborhood needs more businesses and better safety: “One of the things we’re focusing on is lack of businesses … we need support and help so our district can prosper.” Josh Graimer, who said he has lived downtown for 22 years, urged the council to back funding for aging-in-place programs and other supports that would help downtown residents and small businesses.

Why it matters: speakers said downtown has not fully recovered since the pandemic and argued that investments in tree canopy and recovery programs could help economic vitality, public safety and tourism. At least one speaker said a recent letter sent to the council had more than 700 public comments in support.

Council action: items 32 and 33 were included in a larger group of items the council approved later in the meeting; the clerk announced a grouped vote and a tally of 14 in favor. The transcript excerpt provided does not include the item text or staff memos; the council docket and staff reports list the program details, funding amounts and department responsibilities.

Context and concerns: speakers emphasized two main priorities for downtown — supporting small businesses to survive and providing street-level improvements and public safety to encourage visitors. Several speakers requested faster, more targeted responses and that councilmembers work with downtown stakeholders to implement the measures.

Ending: Council adopted items 32 and 33 as part of the meeting’s consent actions; the official docket will have the detailed descriptions, funding sources and implementation timelines for each approved program.","Multiple downtown residents urged the City Council to back investments aimed at downtown recovery and tree canopy improvements. Council approved agenda items 32 and 33 as part of a larger consent bundle (clerk announced 14–0). Speakers cited business loss, safety concerns and prior outreach letters.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":46,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6477890,"City Council approves grouped consent items, most measures pass 14-0",34,2657000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580&start=2657&end=2691","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711125-9036d632da76f3bafe75492369819580/thumbnail_2657000.jpg","/articles/6477890/California/City-Council-approves-grouped-consent-items-most-measures-pass-14-0","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477890-c30fe6e896c13e15dbed630b817f4c31/orig.mp4?Expires=1771170236&Signature=Q1lpyambkeUAf9g6heAHYW8b-C~s8ucYwpvqtNKgOPiJQ6o07wa~FjddMqWgN5xsEn144GON84uY0FA0UAyssZT6p1b---3UyIScwbvh2DDMKc-DmjmUg7srQ1~5TeIoYjLDvSElD-1cZTPHra6eDIUuO5RNZdZwEV3Y1Kv-rjD8B7a2u0sm4u6BRYZUcKWAOX~9SuebsJnJsy1WYv-PNZmUBpRc03ikG-GgUluXjGfLRGnww0di0kZcok9ErZFSLoa-d3~USNikxYhUu5zEDjSLAHS1~FznJTiig4doAqcFnp31HxDMOYvJ-d~434E-sECHvxGI8izpU-LyxhFalA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Los Angeles City Council voted to approve a large group of consent and routine items on the agenda, adopting agenda items 1–6, 8–10, 19–29 and 31–35 by a recorded tally of 14 in favor, 0 opposed.

Council staff announced that items 11–15 and 17 were to be considered together, with item 16 and item 18 called for separate votes earlier in the meeting. After public comment concluded, the council took a single vote on the grouped items and the clerk announced “14 a favor.”

Why it matters: grouped consent votes bundle frequently routine approvals — such as contract renewals, program funding and administrative items — so the council can clear the consent calendar quickly. Even when discussion is brief, adopted items can authorize spending, contracts or program actions that affect city services.

What passed: the clerk identified the set approved as agenda items 1–6, 8–10, 19–29 and 31–35. The meeting transcript did not include full descriptive titles for each agenda number in the record provided here; specifics of each numbered item were not specified in the public-comment excerpts.

Votes and record: the clerk announced the grouped vote and the result (14 in favor). The meeting record did not provide individual member vote names tied to the tally in the transcript excerpt; the roll call earlier in the meeting listed 11 members present for quorum and later the clerk announced 14 voting members present for the grouped vote.

Next steps and exceptions: the council proceeded to consider agenda item 30 with a technical amendment offered by Councilmember Blumenfield after the grouped vote. Item 16 and 18 were previously called for separate votes and recorded as 9–2 in favor when considered separately earlier in the meeting.

Ending: Council minutes and the official council docket will list the formal titles and staff reports for each numbered item; those documents are the authoritative source for the full legal and financial details of each adopted item.","The Los Angeles City Council approved a group of consent and noncontroversial items, voting 14-0 to adopt agenda items 1–6, 8–10, 19–29 and 31–35; item 16 and 18 were called for separate votes earlier in the meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Public commenters criticize Care Plus and outreach programs; raise concerns about criminalization and homelessness services

Downtown residents press council for recovery funding and tree canopy investments; items 32 and 33 approved

City Council approves grouped consent items, most measures pass 14-0