The Brief

Thousands of volunteers are out on streets and sidewalks this week tallying people, tents, vehicles and shelters as part of the annual Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count.

The yearly count of the local unhoused population has become increasingly consequential and controversial in Los Angeles County. The area is home to the largest unhoused population in the U.S., estimated at more than 72,000 last year.

But it’s also one of the few places where homeless population estimates are shrinking. For the past two years, homelessness declined slightly in both the city and county of Los Angeles — even as homelessness surged 18% nationally in 2024, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Whether that trend will continue is far from certain. This year's count comes amid a major transition period for L.A.’s homelessness response system. Serious funding shortfalls threaten homeless services across the region.

Meanwhile, questions are mounting about whether the count itself can be trusted, with some local officials openly expressing doubts about its accuracy and usefulness.

The 2026 results are expected to be released in late spring or early summer.

Here are five key facts about the L.A. homeless count this year:

1. Stakes are high 

Last year's count found homelessness dropped for a second consecutive year, down 3.4% in the city of Los Angeles and 4% countywide. Local officials touted those results as evidence the region’s investments in shelter and homeless services were paying off, after years of increasing homelessness.

At an event in July, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass took credit for the numbers going down.

“ For the first time in our city's recent history, homelessness has gone down two years in a row,” Bass said. “ This lasting change was only possible because we chose to act with urgency and reject the status quo.”

Now, local homelessness officials warn the L.A. region’s unhoused population may be growing again, as some state and local funding for homeless services and housing is disappearing.

The L.A. region’s lead homeless agency, known as LAHSA, is responsible for conducting the count. At an event Tuesday, LAHSA’s interim CEO Gita O’Neill said this year’s homeless count comes at a pivotal time.

“Across Los Angeles, the homeless services system is undergoing major changes, from funding shifts and program transitions to the way outreach, shelter, and housing are delivered,” O’Neill said. “Those changes, combined with ongoing economic pressures, may put the progress we’ve made over the last couple of years at risk.”

Thousands of Angelenos are set to lose federal housing vouchers this year as pandemic era emergency grant funding expires. A large number of homeless services and programs are facing cuts, because of shortfalls in state, county and city budgets.

Officials and service providers say this year’s count will be crucial for understanding the impacts of cuts.

“This year’s homeless count is more important than ever,” said Amber Sheikh, chair of the LAHSA Commission. “With looming funding cuts at all levels of government, this will give us critically needed data to allow us to advocate effectively.”

There's also a new concern this year: Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez's office said heightened activity by federal immigration enforcement officers might add challenges, if more people meant to be counted are laying low.

“Regardless of what the topline numbers show, the urgency remains the same,” Naomi Roochnik, a spokesperson for Hernandez, told LAist. "We need sustained investments in permanent housing, tenant protections, and mental health care to actually reduce homelessness over time."

Gita O’Neill, interim CEO of LAHSA, speaks ahead of the annual homeless count on Jan. 20, 2026.

(

Jordan Rynning

/

LAist

)

2. Regional homelessness agency faces scrutiny, reduced funding

In addition to conducting the count, LAHSA has been responsible for administering most homeless service programs across the region, but that’s in flux.

Recent audits and reports found LAHSA mismanaged funds and failed to collect accurate data on its vendors or properly hold them accountable for providing services.

Last April, L.A. County leaders redirected more than $300 million in funding away from LAHSA and formed a new county homelessness department to oversee the funding itself. The county’s Department of Homeless Services and Housing launched Jan. 1.

LAHSA will continue conducting the annual count with a reduced budget. The agency’s former CEO once warned those funding declines could jeopardize this year’s count.

“ Our team is working to reduce costs for next year's count given this situation,” Va Lecia Adams Kellum said last May. “But even with cost saving adjustments, we anticipate that the current allocations will not provide enough funding for LAHSA to conduct an unsheltered count in 2026.”

The proposed L.A. County homelessness budget for next fiscal year includes $2.3 million for the Homeless Count.

3. Count determines Measure A funding for cities

This year's count will help determine how much money each of Los Angeles County's 88 cities receives from Measure A, the voter-approved half-cent sales tax expected to generate about $1 billion annually for homeless services and affordable housing.

About $96 million from Measure A goes into a Local Solutions Fund divided among all cities. The funding formula is based 90% on each city's homeless count results from the past two years and 10% on the number of extremely low-income households.

That means the homeless count now affects city budgets in a way it never has before.

Based on its unhoused population estimates, the city of Los Angeles got roughly $55 million in the current budget year, 57% of the entire local fund. Smaller cities with fewer unhoused residents are getting far less. Rancho Palos Verdes is allocated about $38,000 and Manhattan Beach $41,000.

Some cities have argued the funding formula is unfair and should be more proportional to a municipality’s tax contributions.

The mayor of Torrance told LAist that the city expects to generate about $26 million annually through the Measure A sales tax and received about $559,000 in local funding. There were 355 unhoused people living in Torrance in February, according to last year’s official estimate.

Kristina Ross navigates for her team of volunteers during LAHSA's annual homeless count on Jan. 20, 2026.

(

Jordan Rynning

/

LAist

)

4. Organizers made some technology updates

LAHSA has made several changes to this year's count following volunteer complaints about the mobile app, which has been plagued by glitches since its introduction in 2023.

“The app as it has been particularly glitchy over the years,” a spokesperson for L.A. City Councilmember Bob Blumenfield told LAist. “We tend to always do a paper count, as well as count through the app, just in case there are any discrepancies.”

For the 2026 count, LAHSA says it has simplified volunteer training, created improved maps in partnership with community stakeholders and assigned more staff to provide technical support at deployment sites.

The agency is also coordinating with county health services and emergency response teams to better count hard-to-reach areas like river embankments, deserts and parks. For example, the Sepulveda Basin in the San Fernando Valley is counted during a specialized daytime operation.

5. Concerns about the annual count’s accuracy

Even with improvements, some remain skeptical about the count's accuracy and usefulness.

L.A. City Councilmember John Lee told LAist the count “falls short of accurately portraying the situation on our city streets” and cautioned against “relying too heavily on a single annual snapshot that may not reflect day-to-day reality.”

“Rather than focusing on a single set of numbers once a year, we should be working year-round to gather consistent data that tracks outcomes like housing placements, retention, and system capacity," Lee said. “That kind of information would be far more valuable in evaluating what's actually working.”

A RAND Corporation analysis released in October found that the annual LAHSA tally has been increasingly inaccurate in recent years. RAND found LAHSA undercounted more than 30% of the population in Skid Row, Hollywood and Venice last year. The analysis was based on RAND’s own professional counts of those neighborhoods.

An LAist investigation last year found that LAHSA used inconsistent data processing methods, without clear documentation or written policies. This led to volunteer app observations being excluded from the data at a higher rate than the year before — and at a higher rate within L.A. city limits than in the rest of the county.

“There have been results in prior years that didn't make sense,” Blumenfield’s spokesperson said, referencing a recent example when count results showed way more RVs in a Reseda corridor than the office’s staff had observed during regular outreach.

Several representatives from smaller cities said they don’t rely solely on the count to understand the crisis on their sidewalks and streets. Santa Clarita officials called the count “one of the many tools used to guide local and regional responses to homelessness.”

Richard Marx knows how to write a pop hit.

His first seven singles all reached the top five of the Billboard Hot 100, with hits like "Satisfied" and "Right Here Waiting." His writing credits include Luther Vandross' "Dance With My Father."

But his latest album is showcasing a different side of him.

After Hours blends Great American Songbook standards with original songs that Marx wrote in that classic style. There's also a five-song EP, After Hours: Live From the Grammy Museum, which came from his August performance there.

Marx will bring the album to the Yaamava’ Theater at Yaamava’ Resort & Casino in Highland on Sunday, Nov. 1.

From backup singer to hitmaker

Marx's journey started when he arrived in Los Angeles at 18.

"The first door opened for me kind of immediately," Marx said in an interview with LAist Morning Edition Host Austin Cross. "The first job I had right out of the gate was singing background vocals for Lionel Richie on his first solo album."

That connection allowed Marx to meet Kenny Rogers, with whom he wrote the No. 1 country song "Crazy." But it would still take years before Marx would find his own success as an artist.

"I remember when I started having success as a songwriter and singing on all these other people's hit records," Marx said. "I really thought that would be the fuel, but every record company rejected me for several years. I got rejected time and time again on songs that became massive hits. So, you have to just believe in yourself and wait for that right opportunity to come around."

Writing like it's 1948

Marx's new album is a real departure from the music that made him a star. Initially, he didn't think he was ready to record these types of songs.

"It was a delusion on my part that I wasn't old enough," Marx said. "I thought, 'I'm not old enough to sing those old standards.' Then it dawned on me that I'm 63 years old."

Marx decided not to just record American classics. He also wrote original music in that same style.

"When I realized that I could create something special in writing half the album, it all started to make sense to me," Marx said. "And I have to say that the writing of this album was the most challenging and enjoyable songwriting I think I've ever done."

The first song Marx wrote for the album was called "All I Ever Needed," which features a trumpet solo by Chris Botti.

"I pretended that I was a young, struggling songwriter in 1948, trying to get Sinatra to cut one of my songs," Marx said. "I took a long walk, and I thought whatever comes into my mind, I'm gonna go with it. An hour later, when I came back home, that whole song was written."

For another song called "Magic Hour," Marx got an assist from his wife, Daisy Fuentes.

"It's my favorite song on the album," Marx said. "The lyrics plagued me for a while. So [Fuentes] and I sat down and had a martini, and she just kept talking and telling me this story, and I turned it into lyrics."

Another highlight on After Hours is Marx's duet with Rod Stewart on the song "Young at Heart."

"Rod was just such a hero my whole life," Marx said. "We just kind of accidentally became great friends over the last four years. And in that process, it was Rod who suggested that we do a duet."

Marx is now looking for new goals.

"I'm in the process now of building my new bucket list, and there's really nothing on it so far," Marx said. "I wanna keep making music that makes me feel the way this album made me feel."

See him live

Tickets for Marx's upcoming show at the Yaamava’ Theater at Yaamava’ Resort & Casino in Highland on Sunday, Nov. 1, are available through AXS.

Actor Walter Koenig, who played Ensign Pavel Chekov, the youthful Russian navigator on the “ Star Trek ” television series and several movies, has died. He was 90.

Koenig died Monday at his home in the North Hollywood neighborhood of Los Angeles, talent agent Zachery McGinnis said in a statement.

In “Star Trek,” Ensign Chekov was the sole Communist-bloc member of the spaceship Enterprise bridge staff. His friendly, supportive presence showed how the rival nations (in the far-off future in which the show was set) were capable of working together.

Speaking heavily Russian-accented English, Chekov embodied stereotypical Russian personality traits, including fierce pride, love of poetry and blind loyalty.

“Star Trek” ran on NBC from 1966 to 1969 and has had an almost unprecedented afterlife as fans, or Trekkies, kept interest in the show alive.

“My heart is heavy,” Koenig's castmate, George Takei, said in a post on the social platform X. “Walter was more than Chekov. He was a writer, a teacher, a thoughtful man, and a loyal friend.”

“Walter’s legacy extends far beyond the screen. Through countless convention appearances and interactions with fans, he shared his kindness, wit, and appreciation with everyone fortunate enough to meet him. He understood what Star Trek meant to people and embraced the community that grew around it,” McGinnis said. “Thank you, Walter, for the memories, the inspiration, and for boldly going where few have gone before.”

McGinnis said Koenig died surrounded by his daughter and niece.

Koenig played Chekov in seven “Star Trek” movies starting in 1979, as well as innumerable other spinoffs, including writing a “Star Trek” book, “Chekov's Enterprise,” in 1980. The TV show has also inspired two spinoff TV series with new casts, and conventions that draw thousands of fans.

He returned to the science fiction genre with occasional appearances in the syndicated 1990s TV series “Babylon 5.”

For nearly a decade, California’s Yes In My Backyard activists and other pro-development advocates have wanted to overhaul California’s signature environmental law to clear the way for more housing construction.

Now Proposition 45 is on the ballot. Supporters say it would, among other things, overhaul that law, known as the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, to clear the way for — you guessed it — more housing construction.

So why are YIMBYs divided?

Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, an Oakland Democrat and one of the movement's most stalwart champions in the Legislature, is for it. So is the bulk of the building industry, including many major for- and non-profit developers.

Bay Area pro-housing advocates Eastbay for Everyone and the Greenbelt Alliance, two typical allies of Wicks, are emphatically against it.

In the uncommitted middle lies the lion’s share of California YIMBYism: Abundant Housing Los Angeles, SPUR, and both California YIMBY and YIMBY Action — the movement’s two flagship advocacy organizations — have all taken neutral positions.

“It’s been a weird campaign so far,” said Ali Sapirman, advocacy manager at the Housing Action Coalition, an urban building industry group that supports the measure. “The housing community has been a little bit fractured.”

Those fissures aren't over whether more homes should be built across California. Instead, it mostly boils down to a question of where.

“The central question here is how you feel about sprawl,” Max Dubler of California YIMBY wrote in the group’s non-endorsement statement, referring to low-density housing development at the edge of metro areas. Though some exurban growth “will necessarily be part of solving our housing shortage,” he expressed concern about making it easier to build “car-dependent sprawl housing and the freeways and water infrastructure necessary to serve that sprawl.”

To sprawl or not to sprawl

For nearly a decade, the Legislature has been on a tear, passing “streamlining” bills aimed at speeding up the regulatory approval of new construction. Almost all of those laws have only applied to projects in places where homes and other infrastructure already exist.

Prioritizing so-called infill development helped wrangle together a coalition of developers and construction labor unions, but also a diverse swath of Democratic-leaning advocates whose interest in seeing more apartments and condos goes beyond the cause of affordability alone. That includes climate activists who want to see less commuter car traffic; transit, bicycle and pedestrian advocates who want more riders and walkers and urbanists who want Los Angeles to more closely resemble Barcelona.

In breaking from that urban focus, Prop. 45 is driving a wedge inside that coalition.

If passed, the measure would speed up the review process required under CEQA (pronounced “see-kwah”) for all types of housing projects. That includes transit-adjacent downtown condo towers, but also freshly paved subdivisions at the metropolitan fringe.

The measure is “a doubling down on essentially 75 years of land-use patterns that we know haven't worked,” said Jordan Grimes, legislative director with Greenbelt Alliance, which opposes the measure. “It's a return to the sprawl era.”

Not everyone in the movement necessarily sees that as a bad thing. Among those who want California to build its way out of its current housing shortage, opinions differ over whether more environmentally-friendly infill development alone is up to the task.

“I'm an ‘all of the above’ person when it comes to housing,” said Wicks, explaining her support of the measure. “I think we need housing of all different types, shapes, and sizes.”

An earlier version of this rift first emerged earlier this decade when a handful of Bay Area tech investors announced plans to build a brand new city on Solano County farmland in 2023 under the banner of California Forever. Some YIMBY commentators applauded the plan as a welcome injection of much-needed supply. Others decried it as sprawl dressed in urbanist clothing.

With Prop. 45, that regional debate is now playing out at a statewide scale.

Housing front and center 

Prop. 45 is about much more than housing policy.

CEQA requires public agencies to review the possible environmental consequences of the decisions they make, including the permitting of private projects. For decades industry groups, developers and, more recently, housing supply boosters have said the law makes it too easy for project opponents to jam up worthwhile projects by repeatedly demanding additional analysis.

“The clock is endless and the number of people and entities who can challenge you are also endless,” said Linda Mandolini of Eden Housing, an affordable housing developer.

Prop. 45 would not exempt any projects from environmental review outright. But for projects deemed "essential," it would narrow the focus of these reviews and require them to wrap up within 365 business days. Any resulting litigation would also face a shot clock; Judges would have 270 business days to resolve them. Such lawsuits would also be made harder to sustain in court. Aside from housing, essential projects include roads, hospitals, schools, clean energy projects, water and broadband infrastructure.

But housing has loomed large in the electoral debate. The Yes on 45 campaign has touted the support of affordable housing developers and housing advocates, while pointing to housing affordability concerns as the initial impetus for the measure.

It’s easy to see why. Environmental challenges to often innocuous-seeming housing projects have regularly generated headlines for years, helping to cement the idea among lawmakers and many voters that CEQA is a major cause of the state’s housing woes.

Environmental justice groups and their allies have spent years fighting against that argument in the Legislature. Though Prop. 45 does not exempt “essential” projects from environmental review outright — it just shortens and hems in the process — these groups have now lined up to oppose it for much the same reason: They reject the premise that CEQA needs fixing.

But for opponents like Grimes, who supported many recent streamlining bills, the argument that the law is holding up desperately needed residential construction is a year out of date. Last year, the governor signed Assembly Bill 130, a Wicks-authored measure that exempted most infill housing from the CEQA.

Since becoming law in July 2025, developers have used it to entitle 17,913 units of housing, according to the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, a state agency.

“When you look at what’s left to do on urban housing, there are absolutely still barriers,” said Grimes, whose organization applauded last year’s exemption. “CEQA just isn't one of them.”

The task of the No on 45 campaign, he said, is to convince enough voters that “we’ve actually solved this problem.”

Are we done here?

Many developers and affordable housing advocates, even those working in urban areas, dispute that CEQA is no longer a major obstacle.

Last year’s exemption does not exempt projects larger than 20 acres, which means supersized urban redevelopment projects are still subject to the old process.

Prop. 45 also applies shot clocks to other permits issued later in the development process and which regularly slow a project more than environmental review.

And while state laws like last year’s infill carveout may grant certain developers the right to ignore CEQA, there is nothing to stop a deep-pocketed opponent from suing anyway. Putting time limits on those lawsuits could be the difference between a project succeeding and being delayed to death, said Mandolini.

She points to the planned 130-unit affordable housing project that Eden Housing has been trying to and failing to build in the Bay Area suburb of Livermore since 2018 as an example. In 2021, a nonprofit funded by a handful of well-heeled Livermore residents sued the city, arguing that it hadn’t done enough environmental analysis on a housing development that would be built on a former grocery store parking lot behind a row of downtown restaurants. A lower court ruled that the group’s CEQA arguments were “almost utterly without merit.” An appellate court agreed. The state Supreme Court allowed that ruling to stand.

But by then two years had passed.

“Every year you lose in litigation is real money for real projects and another year that 130 families don't get to live in that housing,” said Mandolini. “It’s a great way to kill a project.”

Even an infill project.

But among some pro-housing supporters of the proposition, the infill versus sprawl debate isn’t much of a debate at all.

“We’re not an urbanist organization,” said Mahdi Manji with the Inner City Law Center, a legal aid provider and housing advocacy group in Los Angeles’ Skid Row. The group supports Prop. 45 and doesn’t mind the concept of more housing far from the city’s core. “To the extent it results in housing that is a little more affordable in Lancaster and Palmdale, a lot of our clients live out in Lancaster and Palmdale.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.