The Brief

A few months after voters approved higher taxes to combat homelessness, Los Angeles County officials have proposed cutting $62 million from the homeless services budget by slashing several programs.

The spending proposal from the L.A. County Homeless Initiative recommends major cuts to a job training program and one that helps qualified applicants clear their criminal records, according to budget documents. The Homeless Initiative is also recommending eliminating county funding for homelessness prevention programs administered by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, known as LAHSA.

County officials said the proposal reflects a projected budget deficit of $35 million for fiscal year 2025-26 and another $27 million in cost increases.

“We have been forced to make some really difficult recommendations,” said Cheri Todoroff, executive director of the Homeless Initiative. “We prioritized the services that are directly touching people — so, the outreach, the beds and the permanent housing.”

The elimination of county homelessness prevention funding for LAHSA reflects a shift in how the county plans to do prevention work under Measure A, approved by voters in November.

Instead of LAHSA primarily overseeing efforts to provide short-term rental assistance and legal help to keep people in their homes, homelessness prevention could be led by a brand new county affordable housing agency funded by the sales tax, according to Measure A proponents.

“When voters approved Measure A, they were not just approving critical local dollars,” said Tommy Newman, vice president of United Way of Greater Los Angeles. “They were also approving a whole new approach to preventing homelessness, to making housing more affordable.”

As L.A. County works to finalize its $637 million homeless services budget, it’s inviting the public to weigh in on the spending plan.

How Measure A splits the money

Measure A will essentially double L.A. County's revenue for homelessness by replacing a quarter-cent sales tax with a half-cent sales tax. Starting April 1, this new tax is expected to generate more than $1 billion annually, which will be split two ways:

• L.A. County will receive 60% (about $600 million a year) for comprehensive homeless services like outreach, shelter beds and permanent supportive housing.

• The new L.A. County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency will receive about 36% (roughly $400 million a year) to create affordable housing, preserve existing low-rent housing and prevent homelessness through rent assistance and other programs.

This split explains why officials remain optimistic in light of the proposed budget cuts to some homeless services. Some of the reduced or eliminated programs would have their functions taken over by the affordable housing agency.

"I would look at this budget as very much a transition year budget," said Newman. "So that's why when I see some of these curtailments, I sort of put an asterisk on them, because we've got a whole lot of other stuff going on here."

A woman pushes her belongings past a row of tents on the streets of Skid Row.

(

Frederic J. Brown

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

Why a deficit?

Despite the influx of Measure A dollars, county authorities said the L.A. County Homeless Initiative had to make about $62 million in reductions to its budget for homeless services for the coming year.

“It is very, very hard, and I’m not saying that we’re going to be able to do everything we’ve done before with less funding,” Todoroff said. “Some things will be impacted.”

That’s partially because consumer spending slowed over the last year across L.A. County, leading to slightly less sales tax revenue, county officials said. It’s also because the county boosted funding for services for about 2,000 additional people moving into newly-constructed supportive housing between the current budget year and the upcoming one — an additional cost of about $27 million.

The county is responsible for funding services at permanent supportive housing units.

“That's a good thing because that means that we've been building supportive housing across the county, and it's coming online,” Newman said.

More than 80% of L.A. County’s traditional homelessness funding will go toward housing during the next fiscal year, according to the Homeless Initiative’s funding proposal. That includes interim housing, permanent supportive housing and housing acquisition.

Cuts to workforce and legal services

The L.A. County Homeless Initiative recommended slashing funding for the LA:RISE program — which helps homeless Angelenos get and keep jobs, from $8.4 million in fiscal year 2024-25 to about $1.8 million in the coming fiscal year that starts in July.

Administrators of that workforce development program said they were “deeply alarmed and disheartened by the budget recommendations.”

“Following the landmark passage of the Measure A ballot initiative and an increase in revenue for the county, it is shocking that less than 0.3% of Homeless Initiative funding is allocated toward employment and workforce development,” said Greg Ericksen, director of Government Partnerships & Policy at REDF. (The venture philanthropy organization formerly known as the Roberts Enterprise Development Fund is the lead program manager for LA:RISE.)

Ericksen said the proposed cuts will have a devastating impact on program participants as well as the social enterprises they partner with — including Downtown Women’s Center, Homeboy Industries and the Los Angeles LGBT Center.

The county also recommended cutting $1.5 million from a $3.5 million L.A. County Public Defender’s Office program that does mobile legal clinics to help unhoused Angelenos expunge criminal records.

Last year, the program participated in more than 200 outreach events across L.A. County, filed nearly 3,500 expungement petitions and provided direct support to more than 1,400 people who were unhoused or housing insecure, according to the Public Defender’s Office.

As a result of the proposed budget cuts, the program’s outreach staff will be downsized by one-third, according to assistant public defender Thomas Moore.

“We will continue our community engagement, but the staff reduction will result in less participation at community events and resource fairs,” Moore said.

As a result of the county’s recommendations, Moore also said the Public Defender’s partnership with the city of Los Angeles — to help clients clear tickets and misdemeanors — will be eliminated.

LAHSA workers observe LA city sanitation workers removing a houseless encampment during “CARE+” sweep of the houseless encampment on Venice Blvd. in Venice Beach.

(

Brian Feinzimer

/

LAist

)

Cuts to coordination and prevention

The Homelessness Initiative’s draft budget pulls $10 million in funding for LAHSA’s case management system, which helps hundreds of providers work together to match thousands of unhoused Angelenos with services and housing.

But that doesn’t mean coordination will go away, Newman said.

“This is not fully defunding coordination, but it is acknowledging that we need to keep doing a better job of understanding what's the most effective way to coordinate,” he said.

The county’s proposed $20 million cut to prevention programs administered by LAHSA means the agency will drastically scale back efforts to provide short-term rental assistance and legal assistance to help keep people in their homes.

But county officials say that’s where new investments in the new L.A. County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency come in. The new agency is required to spend 30% of its resources (about $100 million in the coming year) on prevention, including eviction legal services, rental assistance and relocation assistance.

“There's going to be a really significant increase in homelessness prevention funding from [the L.A. County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency], and so it makes sense that there's a little bit of a rebalancing going on,” Newman said.

A LAHSA spokesperson did not comment on the county’s specific funding recommendations but said the agency is keeping a close eye on the budget process.

What's next

The Homeless Initiative is expected to present its funding plan to the county Board of Supervisors in March.

The Homeless Initiative will consider feedback on its proposed budget in the coming days. The window for public comment is open until Tuesday, Feb. 4, at this link.

The detailed spending recommendations are available for review here.

“If there’s something that is not included in the funding recommendations that should be elevated above things that are, we want to hear about that,” Todoroff said. “We are all collectively impacted by what is funded and what is not funded, and so we want to hear from as many of you as possible.”

A bipartisan majority in the Republican-led House voted on Wednesday to end the war with Iran, the clearest rebuke yet of President Donald Trump's handling of the conflict and the subsequent economic fallout.

The war powers resolution passed by a vote of 215 to 208, with four Republicans joining Democrats in support.

The resolution had originally been set for a vote two weeks ago, but Republican leaders sent House members home early for a May recess when it appeared the largely Democratic-backed measure had enough Republican votes for passage. However, the extended break didn't shift GOP support to kill the measure.

Ahead of the vote, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., defended Trump's decision to attack Iran.

"Remember … Iran declared war on us 47 years ago. They chant 'death to America.' The president is trying to keep the people safe," Johnson told reporters.

The vote is mostly symbolic. Democrats, despite multiple attempts, have been unable to pass a war powers resolution through the Republican-led Senate. Even if the measure passed in Congress, it would almost certainly be vetoed by President Trump, whose administration has questioned the constitutionality of the War Powers Act.

Still, Senate Democrats have been inching closer. Last month, they won support on a procedural measure to set up a war powers vote after a handful of Republicans broke ranks to join them. A final vote has yet to be scheduled.

The administration has furiously pushed against the effort in both the House and Senate. Wednesday's vote signals his support for the war may be slipping even among some members of his own party.

Now more than 90 days into the conflict, some Republicans have expressed frustration that the war does not appear to have a clear end in sight. Talks to end the war have yet to gain clear traction, casting doubt on a fragile ceasefire. Just hours before the vote, Iran and the U.S. traded strikes in the Persian Gulf.

The conflict began on Feb 28 with strikes by U.S. and Israeli forces on Iran. Under the 1973 War Powers Act, the president has 60 days to end hostilities if there has been no congressional authorization – though he is able to seek a 30-day extension. The same law also gives Congress the ability to end hostilities by voting on a resolution to end military action, subject to presidential veto.

The top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., warned ahead of the May recess when the vote was delayed that the plan was sure to pass.

"Let's be clear: Republicans pulled this vote because they knew they were going to lose it," Meeks said. "They know this war is a political and strategic disaster."
Copyright 2026 NPR

Electric vehicles offer many opportunities to save money: on gas, on oil changes, on engine maintenance. But, it turns out, insurance isn’t one of them. In fact, the latest data shows that EVs typically cost $3,159 per year to insure — nearly $1,000 more than gas-powered cars. It’s an added burden that could make the payback period on EVs significantly longer.

On average, the insurance gap between electric and internal combustion engine, or ICE, vehicles was 42%, according to a report released by the insurance-comparison marketplace Insurify. But it varies drastically by state and model. The most expensive locale was Washington, D.C., where coverage cost $6,394 versus $4,124 for ICE cars. Maine was the cheapest at $1,476, just $184 more than a conventional car. The difference was most pronounced in Rhode Island, which has a 73% spread.

Generally speaking, luxury brands like Tesla, Mercedes-Benz, and Audi are particularly expensive to insure, with premiums on many models topping $4,000. Volvo, Chevrolet, Ford, and Hyundai offer cars at the lower end of the spectrum. Insurify wouldn’t disclose which insurers had the most expensive rates, but did say Lemonade, Root, and GEICO offered the most affordable EV coverage.

“Insurers were charging those higher premiums to balance their risks,” said Julia Taliesin, an economic analyst and insurance agent at Insurify, who wrote the report. It is based on more than 235 million quotes in Insurify’s proprietary database. Seven states — Alaska, Hawai‘i, North Dakota, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming — are excluded due to lower quoting volume. But high insurance expenses means it can take more driving before an EV pays for itself through lower fuel and operating costs. Even if electricity were free and gas stays at $4 per gallon it translates to at least 5,800 more miles a year compared to a car that gets 25 mpg.

A primary reason for the disparity is that EVs cost more to fix.

“We do see that there is a delta in the cost of repair for electric vehicles compared to ICE,” said Ryan Mandell, a vice president of strategy and market intelligence at Mitchell, a company which provides data and software related to car repairs. He pegs the difference at about 15%, noting that batteries are relatively expensive to fix and for mechanics to work around and that EVs have complicated electronics. But there are more fundamental factors as well, like the lack of an engine.

Mandell gave the Ford F-150 as an example. From 2022 to 2025 an electric version of the pickup truck, called the Lightning, was available alongside gas-only and hybrid versions. When Mitchell subjected the gasoline and EV models to a front-end crash test the engine in the traditional model actually absorbed quite a bit of the impact. Because it doesn’t have that additional structure, Ford designed the Lightning with additional reinforcement that cost around 30% more to fix.

“The Lightning had more crash parts on the front of the vehicle,” said Mandell. He also noted that Ford requires removing the battery before doing any work, which increases labor costs. “It adds up.”

Repair costs, however, are not the only factor insurers consider. Insurify’s data showed insurance rates for the two trucks are roughly the same, which Taliesin said suggests driver demographics and behavior play a role, too. “One of the most significant is personal driving history and credit history,” she said. Given the Lightning’s much higher cost, the credit scores of owners could potentially be higher. And Insurify’s data shows that the ticket and accident rates for Lightning drivers are about half that of traditional F-150s.

“Factors like climate risk, vehicle theft rates, population density, insurance regulation, repair infrastructure, and EV adoption levels contribute to regional cost differences,” the Insurify report stated. In several states it cited climate-driven extreme weather, such as hurricanes and flooding, as drivers of high costs.

This EV insurance story isn’t unique to the United States. In 2024, BloombergNEF found about the same spread in the United Kingdom and Germany. France saw double the disparity. Overall, though, American EV owners still paid 87% more for insurance than Europeans.

“Several model-specific factors have driven the wider cost gaps in the large and SUV segments,” said Aleksandra O’Donovan, head of electrified transport at BloombergNEF, pointing to the Tesla Model Y as a particularly extreme example. “[The U.S. price] is nearly triple the insurance rate for the same vehicle in Germany.”

From 2023 to 2025, the EV insurance gap in the U.S. grew from 29% to 49%. But this year, it came down slightly, which Taliesin said is among a few good signs for EV drivers. Another is that the disparity among cars made in the last two years was only 18 percent — compared 42% across all years.

That drop is partly because auto insurance prices fell across the board in the last year. But Taliesin also said that ICE cars are catching up to EVs in terms of how complicated and expensive they are to fix. The cost of EV batteries is also trending downward, too. As EV sales have grown, there is more data for companies to base their prices on and more incentive for them to court EV owners.

”We’ve been seeing a ton of insurance-shopping behavior as insurers have been dropping their rates to compete for business,” said Taliesin, who is bullish for consumers. “That’s definitely a welcome reprieve.”

This article originally appeared in Grist at https://grist.org/transportation/the-hidden-cost-of-owning-an-ev-expensive-insurance/.

Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org