The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

Newsom signs seven bills aimed at addressing homelessness

by •

Gov. Gavin Newsom, alongside Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Chair Hilda Solis, Wednesday signed a legislative package aimed at reducing the state’s homelessness crisis by expanding mental health services and behavioral health housing.

“We can’t nibble around the edges of the homelessness crisis, we need to implement bold, transformative solutions — investing more money than ever before to get folks off the street and provide the mental health and other services they need to stay off the streets,” Newsom said. “Today’s legislation, along with our overall $22 billion housing affordability and homelessness package, will move the needle on creating more housing for the homeless and will allow us to tackle the homelessness crisis in ways California has never done.”

The package includes a bill to reform the Homeless Coordinating and Financial Council into the California Interagency Council on Homelessness and improve its power through data mandates and oversight authorities.

The council will be co-chaired by California Health and Human Services Secretary Dr. Mark Ghaly, and Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency Secretary Lourdes Castro Ramirez.

Newsom also signed legislation to implement California’ Homeless Management Information System’s new data mandates, which will allow policymakers to track and evaluate how homelessness funding makes an impact throughout the state.

“This will allow us to do data-driven policymaking and make sure that we are getting resources out the door in an effective and efficient manner to help those who are suffering on our streets,” Ramirez said alongside the governor Wednesday.

Newsom signed a total of seven bills, which are part of a total $22 billion invested in the homelessness and affordable housing crisis. The Governor’s Office says the funding will help create more than 84,000 affordable homes in the state, including more than 44,000 new housing units and treatment beds for people transitioning out of homelessness. The funding also includes $5.8 billion for Project Homekey, the state’s initiative to buy motels and apartment buildings to house homeless residents.

Newsom’s bills signed Wednesday also include:

— Assembly Bill 27 to identify homeless children and youth enrolled at each school through a housing questionnaire that will be administered;

— Assembly Bill 362 to require cities and counties to inspect shelters that receive complaints from an occupant alleging substandard conditions and require the owner or operator to correct any violation;

— Assembly Bill 816 to require the Department of Housing and Community Development to prioritize funding for projects that serve people experiencing homelessness;

— Assembly Bill 1443 to authorize a county to develop training related to the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, which provides for the involuntary detention and treatment of people with mental health disorders who are a danger to themselves or others; and

— Senate Bill 400 to require a liaison for homeless children of a local educational agency to ensure outreach and coordination activities with other organizations and the referral of services to homeless families and homeless children.

“According to the 2020 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count, we have about 14,000 unhoused residents living with serious mental illness and over 5,000 have developmental disabilities, nearly 11,000 have physical disabilities and another 15,000 are suffering from substance abuse disorder,” Solis said.

Los Angeles County had about 66,000 homeless people before the pandemic began.

19 comments for "Newsom signs seven bills aimed at addressing homelessness"

  1. “Newsom signs seven bills aimed at addressing homelessness.” At least there are some that are trying to make things better for those that really need help. Some don’t want help, but those that do, I hope will receive it. Most people that post here only want to make this about how much they hate Rex, and don’t care one bit about the homeless. Each person experiencing homelessness has a name, and a personal painful story. Thanks to all that invest time to help.

  2. People are soft. Help, the homeless people are coming to get me!!!!!! Americans should be more worried about corporations and foreigners gobbling up American housing causing this level of homelessness. If this BS continues, we’ll be seeing much more homeless on the streets in the years to come.

  3. At least he didn’t adopt Wrecks’ plan of carrying around guns illegally and shooting the homeless if they try to rob you.

    • I’m Amazed by how many folks are angry at the notion that one would protect themselves from a homeless person who is trying to rob them.

      Sounds like a reasonable exchange,
      You could assure that person wouldn’t be doing it any more to anybody else.

      • They aren’t protecting themselves. I know someone who was “robbed on the boulevard by a homeless person.” They were quite happy when law enforcement arrived moments later and beat the snot out of the homeless person taking them into custody (standard LASD practices).

        Upon closer examination the homeless guy had asked the “victim” for a sandwich as she was leaving a sandwich shop. She was scared because people like you and Wrecks had filled her head with “homeless criminals terrorizing the public” nonsense and spun a simple hungry panhandler into a threat to her life and limb. So she handed him the sandwich he asked for, then called 911 and he got the snot beaten out of him.

        No doubt you and Wrecks wish she had just shot the guy. He’s a bloodthirsty elitist scum that would happily depopulate Lancaster of anyone that isn’t putting money in his pockets. What’s your excuse?

        • My excuse is that I think this whole story above is BS.

          Asked for a sandwich my a$$,
          I have personally encountered aggressive panhandling bums many of times and I call BS on your story.

          It’s when you offer them food is when they really get pissed cause that’s not what they are really after.

          • LOL…sure Sonya, anything that doesn’t fit your world view just isn’t real. Narcissism much?

            Off hand, given the average homeless panhandler or you the one I would be more inclined to trust with a gun is the panhandler.

          • Best to try to avoid panhandlers, because I know as a formerly homeless person, there are many different services available for people that are hungry, or need a shower. Most panhandlers are only interested in money and can be quite aggressive. They work corners and some work in teams preying on good natured people. they also use props like wheel chairs, gas cans, etc. Many services are available around The BlVD. or elsewhere in the A.V.

          • Most panhandlers are not homeless and most homeless are not panhandlers. Also most homeless in Lancaster or anywhere else, would never approach a woman, as even they have the sense to know women are more vulnerable, only the aggressive ones make this move. There are services available that all homeless people are made aware of.

      • I’m far more Amazed that a sitting mayor could tell people to break the law and carry guns illegally and shoot someone who tried to rob them. I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and believe in self defense. But what Rex was doing was throwing red meat to his hard line Lancaster supporters and showing the world that his mental state has deteriorated to the point where he really needs to either get help or get out. Remember his fantasy of the mentally ill person shooting a deputy? It never happened. If you watch his TV interview, it appears that Rex really believed it.

        At first when he started talking about bird sounds keeping crime away or that the BLVD was better than Disneyland, you could laugh it off to ‘Rex being Rex’. Now that he is advocating for people to shoot homeless in attempted robberies and making up fake shootings, it’s clear that it is far worse than just ‘Rex being Rex’.

        • More the pity that Lancaster residents are not motivated to vote these politicians out. It’s easier to keep the collective outrage going on this forum.

          • Question: how to get rid of Wrecks?

            Not as “the voters,” but just as me myself. What can I do?

            You are very vocal about what I am doing not working, and you recognize that ultimately it will have to be the voters. I appreciate your perspectives, but you haven’t offered any alternatives.

            This venue may not be ideal, but I think it is the best access to Lancaster voters that I have, within the amount of time I am willing to put to the project.

          • This forum isn’t shining a light on Rex’s dirty deeds; even the panhandlers, homeless, and every single human being in the A. V. knows of every dirty deed and stupid stuff that comes out of his mouth. The alternatives are to put in the footwork to get these people motivated to vote instead of coming up with excuses, or like me, move. Constant complaining about a situation doesn’t solve anything, and just gets boring. After the hit-mailer went out and Rex still won, I moved. You’re a smart guy, you can come up with other alternatives.

          • It will be very difficult to get rid of Wrecks. He owns every board, commission, council and judges in the AV, and most of the big private businesses in Lancaster are beholden to him. The Republicans are too afraid to stand up to him and his bullying. What it will take is a coalition of Republicans and Democrats who care more about the AV than they do about lining their pockets and the pockets of Wrecks. Good luck with that. Most of the so called community leaders who should be representing the interests of the hard working people of Lancaster have been bought and paid for my Wrecks.

            We have the numbers to vote him and his ilk out, but we don’t have the leadership or the will.

          • Clair I long since left Lancaster. Technically I don’t even live in Palmdale. And if I get out “doing footwork” I am gonna be doing something more directly related to me rather than trying to save the dim bulb voters of Lancaster from themselves.

            As far as I think I am willing to fo for them is exactly as far as I have. I work at this computer. When I take a break (frequent) I stretch a bit and I skim a few sites and say a few words. This is one of those sites. If someone happens along and sees what I have said about Wrecks and it opens their eyes, great.

            Because you are wrong about one thing. If you took a poll in Lancaster I would bet that less than half of the people could even name the mayor off the top of their head. They aren’t aware of every dirty deed. They are generally unaware of ANY dirty deeds. That’s the core of the problem.