The Brief

Los Angeles County is home to the largest homeless population in the U.S. — more than 72,000 people, according to official estimates.

In 2024, county voters approved Measure A, a half-percent sales tax increase aimed at raising $1 billion a year for homeless services and affordable housing.

Its backers promised voters more transparency, accountability and results.

As new revenue flows in, questions about how L.A. County spends homelessness dollars aren’t going away.

How Measure A came to be 

Homeless service providers and advocates wrote and campaigned for Measure A in 2024. Their goal was for it to replace a smaller, temporary county sales tax for homeless services known as Measure H, which was set to expire in 2027.

That quarter-percent sales tax, approved by voters in 2017, delivered about $500 million a year.

That new funding helped move more people into shelter beds, and the number of unhoused people in shelters in L.A. County increased from about 15,000 in 2017 to about 23,000 in 2024, according to official estimates.

But the county's overall unhoused population — which includes people staying in shelters, as well as those living on the streets —- grew by 37%, from about 55,000 in 2017 to more than 75,000 in 2024.

Measure A’s solution was to double the special sales tax for homelessness, make it permanent and use the extra revenue to help build more affordable housing in addition to homeless services.

A majority of county voters agreed. The county enacted the “Affordable Housing, Homelessness Solutions, and Prevention Now Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance” — and then started collecting the Measure A tax in April 2025.

Elise Buik, President and CEO of United Way of Greater Los Angeles presents an award to Peter Laugharn, President and CEO of Conrad N. Hilton Foundation at the United Way "Annual HomeWalk To End Homelessness" in 2017. Both organizations were major backers of Measure A, along with the California Community Foundation and others.

(

Greg Doherty

/

Getty Images

)

Measure A’s promises

Voters approved Measure A amid increasing concerns about the regional agency long tasked with managing public homelessness dollars by the county and city of L.A.

A county audit in late 2024 found that the Los Angeles Regional Homelessness Authority, or LAHSA, had regularly paid service providers late and failed to properly monitor contracts. A separate court-ordered report found L.A. city officials had made it impossible to accurately track homelessness spending, largely by outsourcing to LAHSA.

Measure A proposed a new approach to the region’s homeless services system, which many have described as “dysfunctional.” Written into the ordinance were clearer systemwide goals, increased accountability over spending and consequences for programs that fail to perform.

Unlike Measure H, which focused on getting people off the street, Measure A was written also to focus on preventing people from falling into homelessness. It directs more than 35% of its roughly $1 billion in yearly revenue to a new county affordable housing agency. Supporters estimated it could produce 18,000 new affordable units in L.A. County over 10 years.

It directs 60% of revenues toward homeless services — and dedicates a portion of that funding to be split directly among L.A. County’s 88 cities.

Measure A delegated oversight responsibilities for spending to the L.A. County Board of Supervisors and two governance bodies the board had established in 2023 to coordinate regional planning on homelessness.

The first is an advisory group called the Leadership Table for Regional Homelessness Alignment. It includes nonprofit service providers and experts who meet regularly and inform policy decisions.

That group advises a more powerful one called the Executive Committee for Regional Homelessness Alignment, which sets Measure A’s goals and makes plans and funding recommendations.

Its nine members include two county supervisors (currently Kathryn Barger and Lindsey Horvath), the L.A. mayor (currently Karen Bass), an L.A. City Council member (currently Nithya Raman), a representative from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration and four officials from cities across the county.

The committee’s recommendations go to the Board of Supervisors, which has the final say.

Last March, the supervisors formally adopted five-year Measure A goals with 2030 deadlines. They include: reducing unsheltered homelessness in the county by 30%, moving twice as many people annually into permanent housing and boosting affordable housing production by about 50%.

Measure A’s effects

One of the early after effects of passing Measure A has been a reorganization of who controls the growing pot of county homelessness dollars.

In April 2025, the Board of Supervisors voted to divert more than $300 million from LAHSA and create a new county department, the Department of Homeless Services and Housing, to manage homelessness funding directly.

Supporters of the move said it was necessary because Measure A voters were demanding accountability that LAHSA wasn’t delivering. The new county department formally launched in January.

The full transition of LAHSA programs to the county is planned in July. The Board of Supervisors recently directed the new department to create strict oversight procedures for all homeless service contracts.

Last March, L.A. County approved its first annual budget that included projected allocations from Measure A, totaling about $1 billion. The county had twice as much funding at its disposal but still cut tens of millions of dollars in programs and services for unhoused people, citing a strategic shift.

Now, the county is finalizing the budget for the next fiscal year, which starts July 1. It again includes $1 billion for homeless services and affordable housing because of Measure A, but the homelessness spending plan includes nearly $200 million in program reductions.

County officials said those reductions were necessary to cover rising shelter costs and the loss of pandemic-era state and federal funding.

Measure A has allocated about $100 million annually, or roughly 9% of all Measure A revenues, directly to the 88 cities within L.A. County to address homelessness in what’s known as the Local Solutions Fund. The county publishes a regional plan showing how that money is used.

The funding is awarded based primarily on a city’s recent unhoused population numbers, using estimates from the official annual homeless count.

Some city leaders complain their residents are paying way more into the Measure A tax than they are getting out of it.

Torrance mayor George Chen says his city will generate about $26 million annually for the county through the Measure A sales tax, and it will receive about $559,000 in local funding through the measure.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath supported the Measure A sales tax, and also championed the effort to break from LAHSA and form a new county homelessness department.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

Affordable housing focus 

The major structural difference between Measure A and its predecessor is that it earmarks roughly 36% of its proceeds — about $363 million a year — for affordable housing development. Those funds flow through a new independent regional agency called the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency, or LACAHSA.

The agency’s mandate is to create new affordable homes, preserve lower-rent housing and prevent displacement. It is still in its early stages.

As of March, the agency had received $275 million from Measure A and distributed $25 million to recipients, according to its Measure A Funds Tracker. Most of what had been awarded was emergency rental assistance.

On April 15, the agency’s board conditionally approved its first major round of housing production funding, approximately $102 million for 10 projects that will add 566 units of affordable housing, according to a recent report.

Projects are required to break ground within one year of receiving awards. A second round of awards is scheduled for the board's May 13 meeting.

Demand for funding far outpaced what was available: LACAHSA received 242 applications for 127 projects totaling $1.56 billion and representing 11,484 units.

What’s next?

The goals Measure A set are ambitious, and the deadline is 2030. A county dashboard tracking progress shows the region gaining ground reducing unsheltered homelessness while falling behind on other targets.

The county hasn’t made any progress decreasing the number of people falling into homelessness or decreasing homelessness among people with mental health or substance-use disorders. The dashboard does not yet include affordable housing production metrics.

The transition from the regional Homeless Services Authority to the new county Department of Homeless Services and Housing is still underway, with a full handoff of staff and programs targeted for this July.

LAHSA recently announced it will lay off 284 employees at the end of June.

Federal cuts and changes to funding from Medicaid and the U.S. Housing and Urban Development — flagged as “threats to recent progress” in the county's recent budget documents — loom over the entire system.

It's a sunny, warm Wednesday on deck so make sure you stay hydrated and apply that SPF.

Daytime highs at the beaches are going to stay in the low to mid 70s, and reach 85 to 95 degrees in the valleys. Similar conditions are expected for the Inland Empire.

For communities in the Santa Monica Mountains, temperatures will stay in the mid 80s.

And in Coachella Valley, temperatures will once again be in the triple digits, with highs of up to 108 degrees.

Congratulations to those lucky — or deep-pocketed — enough to score a ticket to one of eight World Cup games in Los Angeles. (If not, it's not too late.)

That now means a visit to Los Angeles Stadium in Inglewood — or SoFi Stadium to the rest of us — along with tens of thousands of others, all jostling to get in, seated, fed, and out.

SoFi is home to both of the city's (American) football teams: The Rams and The Chargers. And the ginormous arena plays host regularly to music's biggest names.

So it's all well-trotted territory. But to make your journey a bit easier, here's our cheat sheet on SoFi.

Driving?

We have to ask: you sure you want to get in a car? Because there are many public transit options to help you avoid traffic and save you money.

My colleague and transportation reporter Kavish Harjai has put together an entire transit guide for said purpose.

Still driving?

Fine! When in Rome ... we get it. In addition to navigating game-day gridlock, you’dll arlso have to park that thing.

Parking at and near SoFi Stadium

You can purchase official parking for each game. And offsite parking too. Inglewood’s Park & Go offers remote parking and shuttle service every 15 minutes to the stadium.

Pro-tip 1: Most of the streets near SoFi are permitted for residents only. Your car will be towed.

Pro-tip 2: There will be folks selling parking spots in private lots and driveways. As they say, caveat emptor.

Pro-tip 3: It could take at least an hour to get out of SoFi after the game. Use the restroom before heading to your car and pack your patience.

Food and stuff

Pregame: As my colleague Gab Chabron says, Inglewood's food scene reflects its Black and Brown residents that make up nearly 90% of its population. So grab some mightily tasty wings at a strip mall, or go a little fancy at a supper club co-founded by actor Issa Rae. Gab has all the details and more recommendations on his guide.

Game time: Plenty of options too at SoFi, which you can find here.

Pro-tip 1: After some back-and-forth, FIFA now allows fans to bring in one, soft, plastic 20 oz factory sealed disposable water bottle to the match. No other outside food or drink is allowed.

Pro-tip 2: The stadium does not accept cash.

Pro-tip 3: SoFi has a strict bag policy. Read what is allowed here.

Pro-tip 4: Yes, you can bring a poster and a flag. But there are strict rules on what those signs say.

Recommendations on how to spend $3.7 million recovered from the Andrew Do corruption scheme will be left to his successor — and long-ago boss-turned-foe — Supervisor Janet Nguyen, under a plan advanced Tuesday by Orange County supervisors. The money is expected to be devoted to benefitting his former constituents, with exact spending plans to be proposed later.

The supervisors moved forward with a proposal by Nguyen to transfer the recovered dollars into her district’s discretionary funds, which she makes recommendations on how to spend. In doing so, they opted not to pursue a notion floated by Supervisor Don Wagner to spend the funds outside the district — an idea that faced intense pushback from dozens of public commenters at Tuesday’s meeting.

“ These funds were recovered in connection with the Andrew Do corruption matter,” Nguyen said. The money, she added, “should be returned back to the benefit of the 1st District community that were deprived of the intended services and public benefits.”

Nguyen said a variety of community needs could be addressed with the dollars, including helping people affected by multi-day mass evacuations over a recent explosion risk at a Garden Grove industrial facility.

As LAist reported when uncovering the corruption scheme, Do used the district discretionary process to allocate millions of dollars in the scheme without it ever appearing on public agendas. Under a state law passed in response to the Do scandal, spending of those funds in O.C. now must go to a public vote of the full board and be posted in an online spending log.

Supervisors have not yet decided how much of the recovered funds will go to communities such as Santa Ana that were in Do’s district during the first year-and-a-half of the four-year scheme, before the map changed due to redistricting. That question will be decided when the board votes on Nguyen’s spending recommendations.

Residents want the money to stay in the district

The supervisors’ move came after more than 50 residents of Do’s former district spoke to the board during public comments — all urging that the funds be spent in the district it was originally intended for. Wagner previously said he wanted a discussion on where to spend it because there are so many needs “across the county.”

“ This is shameful that you're even considering that this money not return to our district,” said Anne Calvo, a senior in Seal Beach’s Leisure World community.

“Please return the funds that are due to our district that were stolen from us,” said Calvo, who was appointed by Nguyen to the county’s Older Adults Advisory Commission.

“Please don't steal these funds twice,” said Huntington Beach resident Lori Sueki.

Vietnamese-language media covers a packed audience during public comments about the fate of $3.7 million recovered from the Andrew Do corruption scheme, during the OC Board of Supervisors’ public meeting on Tuesday, June 9, 2026.

(

Jill Replogle/LAist

)

Nguyen said it was the most number of speakers she could recall speaking on one topic at a supervisors’ meeting in the year and half since she re-joined the board.

In the days leading up to the discussion, Nguyen put out email blasts calling on constituents to send letters and speak up for devoting the funds to the district.

Several elected officials in local cities were among those calling on the board to spend the money in the district.

“ Other districts vying for the 1st District's funds, which are rightfully the 1st District's, is crazy,” said Butch Twining, an elected city councilman for Huntington Beach.

“Your respective districts have already received 100% of your funding,” Twining said.  ”The money is for our kids, our seniors, our veterans, to aid in providing help to our homeless and underserved communities, our public safety.”

The money diverted in the scheme was originally intended to feed vulnerable seniors and people with disabilities in his district, which included Little Saigon, Huntington Beach and — in the earlier part of the scheme — Santa Ana.

The diversion of the funds “hurt and created true victims of residents who were denied the services, the assistance, the opportunities, to recover quickly and to have their needs addressed,” said Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento, who was mayor of Santa Ana during the pandemic.

“The money should go back to those that were harmed. But let's figure out who was harmed and make sure that we look at that,” he said, noting the changes to the district lines.

Fallout

Do is now serving a five-year sentence in federal prison after he admitted to accepting bribes in exchange for awarding millions in tax dollars meant to feed needy seniors and people with disabilities in his district.

As part of the plea deal, Do acknowledged taking more than $800,000 in bribes through his two daughters, including a down payment on the house his youngest daughter Rhiannon Do later forfeited to resolve the criminal case. The unaccounted-for dollars were first uncovered by LAist.

Federal officials recovered money from seized bank accounts and two properties connected to the bribes — including the Tustin house his daughter bought.

Millions more haven’t been recovered, at least yet

The amount of taxpayer money recovered so far is less than half of the $7.9 million Andrew Do admitted was diverted from specific meal contracts.

In a lawsuit seeking to recover funds, the county alleges the total amount lost was even larger: $13.25 million. The county’s suit — scheduled for trial in November 2027 — covers all of the money Do gave to two nonprofits, Viet America Society and Hand to Hand Relief Organization.

That leaves more than $4 million — and possibly much more — not yet recovered.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office noted they have an ongoing criminal case against Do’s alleged co-conspirator Peter Pham.

“Assuming we obtain a conviction in that matter, we would expect to seek restitution,” the spokesperson, Ciaran McEvoy, said.

Pham left the country on a flight to Taiwan in late 2024 and remains a fugitive, according to McEvoy. The case against him also includes charges against another alleged co-conspirator, Thanh Huong Nguyen, who led the Hand to Hand nonprofit.

The scandal has also been costly to taxpayers in other ways. In addition to what the county has spent on legal fees to pursue the lawsuit, $1.7 million has been spent on outside contracts — including a forensic audit — Supervisor Katrina Foley said on Tuesday.

The Phillips 66 oil refinery in the South Bay is shutting down, and nearby communities want a say in what comes next. But some residents worry they’re already being left out.  

Carson officials had called for creating a task force that would include community members to provide recommendations during the redevelopment process, but the effort has stalled.

City officials say they’re in direct conversation with Phillips 66 and are hosting community town halls for residents.

The background

Phillips 66 announced its intention to close its L.A. refinery in 2024, citing an aging facility and increasingly strict state regulations. The refinery spans more than 650 acres and has two main complexes, one in the L.A. neighborhood of Wilmington and one in Carson. They’re connected via a 5-mile pipeline. The company processed its final barrel of crude oil late last year.

Soon after Phillips 66 announced its intent to close, the Carson City Council passed a yearlong moratorium on proposals to develop the site and amended the general plan to give the council authority to approve the final plans for redeveloping the portion of the property within city limits.

What Carson leaders said 

When the moratorium expired last year, and in anticipation of the company submitting a project proposal, Carson Mayor Lula Davis-Holmes directed staff to put together a task force — including residents, City Council members and other stakeholders — to help inform the cleanup and redevelopment of some 223 acres of the company’s land within Carson city limits.

“ I know that my residents are real concerned about what they would like to see on that site versus them being told after the fact,” Mayor Pro Tem Cedric L. Hicks Sr. said at a council meeting last September, when he also expressed support for establishing a task force.

Task force effort stalls

Nearly nine months later, a task force has not been created.

In a statement to LAist, Carson spokesperson Margie Revilla-Garcia said the task force hasn’t yet been established “as staff is still discussing its structure internally.”

“At this time, no timeline has been established for the creation of the task force,” Revilla-Garcia wrote in an email.

Councilwoman Arleen Rojas, whose district includes the refinery, said a task force is premature — cleanup should be the priority.

“We have the community that’s been giving us ideas on what they want there, but we really need to clean it up,” she said.

Rojas said the council established an ad hoc committee that regularly meets with Phillips 66 about the cleanup. Meanwhile, she said the city has hosted and will hold more town hall meetings to educate residents about the cleanup process, which is likely to take years.

In April, Phillips 66 submitted its initial plan to turn the site into warehouses and industrial buildings. (The company submitted a proposal for its Wilmington site in August 2025 to the city of L.A.)

What’s next

Some Carson residents worry that without a designated task force, their concerns could go unheard as Phillips 66 carries out a largely unprecedented cleanup and redevelopment effort.

Jonathan, a Carson resident who grew up with a window view of the nearby Valero oil refinery, said most of his neighbors know little about the Phillips 66 closure. (LAist is not publishing his surname because he fears for family members who are in the U.S. without documentation.) He learned about the creation of a task force via the environmental justice advocacy group Asian Pacific Environmental Network, or APEN.

That group had pushed for a task force that would be included in cleanup conversations, not only redevelopment efforts.

He added that a task force could allow residents to have some say in rectifying longstanding health and pollution concerns from the area’s refineries.

“We get pollution stains on our walls inside because the air is just that dirty,” he said. “In some ways it's a lot like living next to a giant bomb that you don't really know the timer.”

He hopes a task force could help influence the current proposal, which is fully industrial.

“ Living in the shadow of a refinery makes you yearn for way more green spaces,” he said.