The Brief

California counties are reporting decreases in homelessness, suggesting the state is finally making progress in solving one of its most difficult and persistent problems.

But even as Gov. Gavin Newsom and local officials are celebrating, the money that made those wins possible is at risk of evaporating.

President Donald Trump’s administration this month tried to block organizations that don’t support its social agenda from accessing federal homeless housing funds — causing experts in the field to worry that politically liberal California could find itself blacklisted from crucial dollars.

Cuts to state homelessness funding are also on the horizon, and some local jurisdictions are pulling back funds as they struggle with their own budget deficits. That has counties, nonprofits and industry experts worried California’s homeless counts will soon go right back up.

“I do think that we’re doing something right,” Sharon Rapport, director of California state policy for the Corporation for Supportive Housing, said of the recent decreases. “That all may come to a crashing end with a lot of concerns with what’s happening at the federal level, federal policy changing and funding cuts happening.”

Of the 29 places in California that reported an official homeless census this year, more than half saw a decrease compared to 2024, according to an analysis of point-in-time counts by the Hub for Urban Initiatives. That includes drops of about a quarter in Contra Costa and Sonoma counties, 20% in Santa Cruz County, 16% in Ventura County and 14% in Merced County.

San Diego and Los Angeles counties each saw a decrease of less than 10%. For LA County, this marks the second year in a row that homelessness is down.

But funding worries loom like a black cloud over those promising results. As purse strings tighten, service providers will have to cut staff, programs and bed capacity, meaning they can help fewer homeless people. For years, California cities, counties and nonprofits have been pushing the Newsom administration to provide an ongoing source of homeless funding, so service providers can plan ahead without worrying each year about how much money they’ll get.

Some organizations already are feeling the squeeze.

From December through July, Union Station Homeless Services in Los Angeles County turned away 700 families who needed housing, said CEO Katie Hill.

“We just don’t have anything available for them,” Hill said.

The county cut housing vouchers as the city and county struggled with financial fallout from recent wildfires, falling property tax revenues and increasing legal payouts.

Other organizations are closing their doors for good. Downtown Streets Team, which helps unhoused residents in 16 California cities find housing while earning money cleaning up local streets, plans to close next month after two decades of service.

“The financial and political environment we operate in has shifted dramatically in recent months,” CEO Julie Gardner said in an emailed statement. “During this time, (Downtown Streets Team) lost several significant contracts and grants, creating a multi-million-dollar loss in overall funding. When combined with other factors, including rapidly rising operational costs, these losses made it impossible to continue running the organization in a financially sustainable way.”

‘I just don’t think we’re going to see that funding’

Congress in 2023 appropriated $75 million for something called the Continuum of Care Builds grant, which was supposed to help support the construction of new homeless housing. Former President Joe Biden’s administration started the application process for those grants in 2024. When Trump took the helm in 2025, his administration re-started the process with new criteria, making applicants apply again.

Then, at the start of September, the Trump administration made everyone apply a third time — with a very different set of criteria seeming to disqualify organizations that support trans clients, use “harm reduction” strategies to prevent drug overdose deaths or operate in a “sanctuary city.”

Applicants had to attest that they don’t deny the “sex binary in humans or promote the notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic.” They had to promise not to distribute drug paraphernalia or allow the use of drugs on their property.

Applicants also had to attest that they operate in a city, county or state that cooperates with federal immigration enforcement. Newsom has resisted Trump’s immigration crackdown at a state level, and recently signed a set of bills intended to further check ICE.

And applicants were required to operate in a city, county or state that prohibits public camping and enforces that rule. That one could be an easier lift: Arrests and citations for camping-related activities have soared in some California cities over the past year, after the U.S. Supreme Court gave cities more leeway to crack down, and Newsom encouraged cities to ban camping. But two recent statewide attempts to ban homeless camps from near schools and other areas fell flat.

The new funding rules were a major blow to Contra Costa County-based Hope Solutions, which was initially selected to receive $5.5 million to build 15 tiny homes for homeless 18-24-year-olds in Pittsburg. After staff spent at least 100 hours completing the project proposal, they learned this month that they’d no longer qualify because of the new criteria. The Pittsburg Police Department says it does not participate in immigration enforcement. In addition, the new program rules specify the money must go to buildings that serve elderly residents — an about-face that takes Hope Solutions’ youth project out of the running.

“It felt like a gut punch,” said CEO Deanne Pearn, “and really disheartening to know that we had spent so much time and asked so much of our county partners and others, and that that time could have been spent elsewhere.”

The camp where a person experiencing homelessness lives on a hillside above U.S. Route 50 in Sacramento, on Oct. 25, 2024.

(

Fred Greaves

/

CalMatters

)

Hope Solutions is still moving forward with the project, which Pearn hopes the organization can fund with its own financial reserves. But that means the nonprofit won’t have that money for its next project.

The National Alliance to End Homelessness recently sued the Trump administration over the new grant conditions, claiming that all projects in California and three dozen other states would be ineligible for funds. Earlier this month, a federal judge sided with the Alliance, and temporarily barred the federal government from distributing those funds.

Now, that $75 million is frozen as the case moves forward.

While the new conditions at issue in the lawsuit apply only to one specific federal homelessness grant, experts worry it’s an ominous sign for California. Service providers expect applications to open this fall for the main source of federal homelessness funding — the Continuum of Care Program — which funneled about $600 million to California counties in 2023.

If that application poses similar requirements, California could be in trouble.

“Personally, I just don’t think we’re going to see that funding,” said Hill, of Union Station Homeless Services in Los Angeles County.

In a separate lawsuit, San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties sued the Trump administration over contracts that prevented recipients of federal homeless funds from using the money to promote “gender ideology,” “elective abortions” and “illegal immigration.” The counties won an early victory last month, when a judge temporarily blocked the administration from imposing those conditions.

Other federal cuts are looming, too. The Emergency Housing Vouchers program, which launched during the COVID-19 pandemic and now helps more than 15,000 Californians pay their rent, is expected to run out of money next year.

That’s not even counting the cuts to housing vouchers and other federal housing and homelessness programs Trump proposed in May, which are still being negotiated in Congress.

California turning a corner on homelessness

California appears to be decreasing its homeless population, according to the Hub for Urban Initiatives, a California organization that helps local communities shape their homelessness policy, apply for grants and survey their homeless populations.

The 29 California communities that counted and reported their homeless populations this year tallied a total of 131,209 people — a 4% decrease from what those same communities reported last year. That’s a significant step for a state where the homeless population has been stubbornly rising for years.

That data comes from the federally mandated homeless point-in-time count, where teams of volunteers count the unhoused people they see on the street on one night in January. The counts are imperfect, as volunteers can overlook people sleeping in out-of-the-way places, and different counties use different methods — while some places count every year, others count every other. Of the 44 “continuums of care” required to count in California (some small, rural communities combine multiple counties into one continuum of care), 14 didn’t count this year.

The federal housing department will release an official total for the state later this year.

Newsom trumpeted the initial decreases, taking credit for pouring money into homeless housing and other services. He’s not wrong.

Contra Costa County, which saw the state’s biggest drop in homelessness this year, attributes its success largely to the recent boost in state funding, said Christy Saxton, director of Health, Housing and Homeless Services for Contra Costa County. Over the past two years, the county increased its homeless shelter and housing capacity by more than a third.

A big piece of that was the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention program, which Newsom launched in the 2019-20 budget year to fill what until then had been a void of state homelessness funds. For the past few years, that program gave cities and counties $1 billion each year.

Those funds support programs such as Contra Costa County’s Delta Landing temporary housing site in Pittsburg, which opened 172 units in 2021. Until then, that part of the county had about 20 beds for its unhoused residents, Saxton said.

But instead of making that state funding ongoing, Newsom’s administration opted to dole it out in one-time grants each year, leaving cities and counties continually guessing what next year’s budget will bring.

This year, that state program will get no new funding (because of the glacial pace at which the state distributes these funds, cities and counties have yet to receive money from the last round). Next year, the amount is set to shrink to $500 million.

“We are significantly concerned about the cuts that are coming,” Saxton said, “because it has taken an influx of money in order to see those decreases, and we need that to continue on now more than ever.”

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

A federal judge ruled today that the Trump administration is not entitled to personal information belonging to California’s 23 million voters. Judge David O. Carter made the ruling.

Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice sued California, along with 22 other states and Washington, D.C., for access to their full, unredacted voter files. That includes driver’s license, social security numbers and other sensitive data.

DOJ officials said they needed the data to assess whether states were properly maintaining their voter rolls and ensuring "only American citizens are voting, only one time," as Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a social media post in December.

California refused, citing state and federal privacy law. Only a handful of states have complied with the government’s request for their full voter files, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has been tracking the issue nationwide.

What did the judge say?

In Judge Carter’s ruling, he wrote that amassing sensitive information at the federal level would have a chilling effect on voter registration, which would lead to decreased turnout “as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

He added, “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy."

LAist emailed a request for comment to a spokesperson for the Department of Justice but has not yet received a response.

Reaction to the ruling

Jenny Farrell, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California, applauded the decision. The group had joined California in opposing the government’s data request.

“ We think that voters should never have to choose between their privacy interests and the right to participate in our democracy,” she said.

Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former Department of Justice employee said, “The court did what we thought the court should do.”

Levitt and a group of other former DOJ employees had filed an amicus brief in the case, siding with California.

In a news release, California Secretary of State Shirley Weber wrote: “I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration's disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

What's next?

The DOJ's lawsuits against other states are still making their way through the courts.

During a hearing in the case in December, Judge Carter said he anticipated his eventual ruling — whichever way it went — would be appealed, and that a final decision on the issue could rest with the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Superior Court judge has found that the city of Los Angeles violated public open records laws nearly two years ago by taking action on matters related to its homelessness response and failing to report it.

That decision could be a factor in an ongoing hearing in federal court where a different judge is considering whether to hold the city in contempt of court.

In a ruling last week, L.A. County Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin found that the city violated the Brown Act on two occasions in January and May 2024 when it took action in closed session on the following:

— approving an encampment reduction plan;

— approving a memorandum of understanding with the county for support on interim housing beds and other issues.

Afterward, the city did not report those approvals in open session.

The city argued its actions were allowed under the Brown Act because they stemmed from the ongoing settlement between the city and the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a group of business owners and residents who sued the city over its response to the homelessness crisis.

But Kin disagreed with that argument, saying what the city had done in closed session did not fall within the Brown Act exemptions because they were policy decisions, not litigation decisions concerning the L.A. Alliance settlement.

In federal court, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has been overseeing the city’s compliance with the settlement. Carter has said he’s concerned “the city has demonstrated a continuous pattern of delay” in meeting its obligations.

Carter has been hearing testimony since November from city officials and others in an ongoing contempt-of-court hearing. This week, the judge said in court documents that he would consider Kin’s ruling as the contempt hearing proceeds.

The parties were last in federal court earlier this week. It’s not yet clear when that hearing will resume.

Sidewalk vendors can now apply to receive a free, health-code-compliant food vending cart through a new program launched in a partnership between the county and the city of Los Angeles.

Who can apply

To receive a cart, applicants must be at least 18 years old, live in LA County, be self-employed as a sidewalk vendor, and earn less than $75,000 annually from vending, according to a news release. Applicants must operate within unincorporated LA County or the city of LA, and commit to full compliance with public health and safety regulations.

You can find the application here.

Permits to secure

Vendors who are awarded carts will have to secure required permits in order to begin operating as fully permitted businesses. This includes obtaining the Compact Mobile Food Operation (CMFO) certificate from the LA County Department of Public Health and any Sidewalk Vending Registration Certifications or permits required to comply with the county and city sidewalk vending programs.

Applications will be selected by lottery, will be reviewed on a monthly basis, and will be prioritized based on “compliance readiness.” Priority will also be given to those who are based in the county’s “highest-need areas,” as according to the county equity explorer map.

Eligible applicants will be connected to partner organizations like Inclusive Action for the City to help navigate the permitting process and to provide business business support and language assistance.

What kind of carts?

Carts offered through the program include:

• Integrated grill carts for precooked meat for tacos, hot dogs, and hamburgers that are assembled on a cart
• Hot-holding carts for pre-portioned cooked tamales, corn, quesadillas, gyros, pupusas
• Cut fruit carts for fruits, bionicos, and acai bowls
• Cold-hold ice cream carts that store prepackaged ice cream items

Currently, the county and city have 50 hot-holding and 30 cold-holding carts for the first round of awards with 40 integrated grill carts underway.

More about the program

The launch of the Sidewalk Vending Cart Program – which invests $2.8 million in more than 280 carts – follows the passage of state legislation that decriminalized street vendors and that streamlined the permitting process.

“The program aims to help vendors meet new legal requirements, overcome financial barriers to formalization, and operate safely and legally in their communities,” according to the news release.

Los Angeles County Board Chair Hilda Solis said the program can help ensure a “permitted pathway” toward entrepreneurship.
“Many vendors are navigating increasingly difficult and uncertain times due to cruel federal immigration actions, and we know vendors play an essential role in the economic and cultural vitality of Los Angeles County,” Solis said in a statement. “This is more than a program — this is a chance to support small business growth, economic stability, and even generational wealth.”

The biggest mobile network in the United States, Verizon, experienced a huge outage on Wednesday, leaving at least tens of thousands of customers without cell service for much of the day.

An update on Verizon's website today said the outage had been resolved. "We are sorry for what you experienced and will continue to work hard day and night to provide the outstanding network and service that people expect from Verizon," it said.

What happened?

It's still unclear. Verizon has not posted details nor an explanation of the cause of the outage on its website. In an email to NPR, a company spokesperson wrote that the problem stemmed from "a software issue" and that Verizon is conducting a full review.And while Verizon hasn't released a figure for how many customers were affected, the staff at the Downdetector website — where users go to report service outages — posted on Facebook that they received 2.3 million outage reports for Verizon throughout the day. (That doesn't necessarily translate to 2.3 million affected customers.)

Cell networks experience small outages fairly regularly, though, and sizable ones are not uncommon. Verizon had a disruption across several major cities in September 2024, and competitor AT&T was hit by a large outage in February 2024, affecting more than 125 million registered devices and customers in all 50 states.

Sanjoy Paul, a wireless network expert at Rice University, says telecommunications systems have become more complex over the past decade and a half as they've moved from physical infrastructure — wires and cables — and into the cloud.

"What used to be a completely hardware-dependent network transformed into a complete software-dependent network," he said. That shift has given operators more flexibility to add services or tweak products but, he said, it has come at the expense of reliability.

With a cloud and software-based networks, there are more opportunities for glitches and attacks, he said. Small issues with computer code buried inside these systems can have big consequences.

What have been some consequences of the outage?

Users had no connectivity for much of the day and were only able to access "SOS" mode during the outage.

Verizon, which has styled itself as America's best and most reliable network, has been in damage control mode. The company has issued instructions for customers to restart their devices to reconnect to the network if they are still having problems. It also pledged $20 credits as "a way of acknowledging your time and showing that this matters to us," according to their website.

The Federal Communications Commission said in a statement it was "continuing to actively investigate and monitor the situation to determine next steps."

Could it happen again?

Yep — to Verizon or any of its competitors.

Since the cause of this latest outage remains unclear, it's too early to say whether or not this exact thing could happen again. But Lee McKnight, an associate professor in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University, told NPR's Morning Edition outages are "a fact of life these days for major telecommunications firms."

"Modern telecom networks are cloud networks. 5G networks are mainly, like, hundreds of different cloud services," he said. "The telecom companies haven't yet adjusted their training to that reality, that their staff have to be expert not just in cell towers and wireless, like we think about, but about cloud services, like AWS, or Microsoft, or Google."

At the end of the day, experts say, consumers should consider having a "Plan B" for connectivity. That may mean a land line for your house or getting a second phone on a different cell network.
Copyright 2026 NPR