Traci Park Aligns with Newsom’s Call to Criminalize Homelessness, Despite Data and Expert Warnings

In a recent newsletter, Los Angeles City Councilmember Traci Park praised Governor Gavin Newsom’s latest directive encouraging cities to use the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision to increase enforcement against homeless encampments. “I’ve been doing that on the Westside from day one,” Park wrote, referring to the frequent encampment clearings and expansion of anti-camping zones in her district. She also announced new legislation to expand Los Angeles’s controversial ordinance, LAMC 41.18, which prohibits sitting or sleeping in many public areas.

Park’s support for heightened enforcement comes as a growing number of civil rights organizations, public health experts, and unhoused advocates warn that this strategy not only fails to address homelessness, but deepens the crisis.

The Grants Pass v. Johnson ruling, issued in 2024, overturned a key legal precedent that had protected unhoused people from being cited or arrested when no shelter was available. In response, Newsom urged cities to use the ruling to increase enforcement, framing it as a solution to what he called “unacceptable conditions” in public spaces.

But legal advocates argue that what’s being framed as public order is, in effect, the criminalization of poverty.

“The Grants Pass decision gives cities legal cover to punish people for being homeless,” said Adrienna Wong, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California. “That’s not a solution. It’s a human rights violation.”

Park has positioned herself as a leader in enforcement-first homelessness policy in Los Angeles. Her district, which includes Venice, has been the site of frequent encampment sweeps. Park has expanded the use of LAMC 41.18, adding dozens of new locations—such as senior centers and fire-prone areas—where unhoused people are now prohibited from resting.

Despite the aggressive approach, the data doesn’t support its effectiveness. A 2024 report from the City Controller’s office found that, over two years of enforcing 41.18, only two people were placed into permanent housing. The vast majority of those displaced simply moved to nearby blocks or returned after city staff left. The report also found that 81% of cleared encampment sites were re-occupied.

“What we’re seeing is churn, not solutions,” said an outreach worker in CD11 who requested anonymity due to fear of retaliation. “We move people around, destroy their tents and medications, and tell them they’re not welcome anywhere. Then we’re surprised when they don’t just disappear.”

The enforcement-heavy approach also comes at a high cost. Millions of dollars have been spent on police-led sweeps, sanitation operations, and fencing off public spaces—money that advocates argue could be used to fund housing and services. Meanwhile, unhoused residents report that belongings are regularly confiscated or destroyed, including ID documents, medication, and survival gear.

Dr. Margot Kushel, a UCSF physician and homelessness researcher, warns that the strategy is actively harmful. “When you disrupt someone’s stability—however fragile—it becomes harder to engage them in care or connect them to housing,” she said. “Sweeps don’t make people safer. They make them sicker.”

Park’s support for Governor Newsom’s directive has raised alarm among civil rights organizations. In a joint statement, several California ACLU chapters called Newsom’s plan a “cruel tactic” that prioritizes visibility over solutions. The statement emphasized that cities should not be rewarded for displacing unhoused people under the guise of public safety.

Even the Los Angeles Times editorial board, which often supports centrist policies, warned against using the Grants Pass decision to expand enforcement. “Shooing \[people] from one street to another does not solve homelessness,” the board wrote, specifically criticizing Park’s call for Los Angeles to act quickly to avoid becoming a “magnet” for unhoused people from stricter jurisdictions.

In response to such criticisms, Park and her supporters argue that enforcement is necessary to maintain public space and connect people with services. But outreach workers and service providers say the evidence tells a different story.

“People don’t accept services during sweeps. They’re in survival mode,” said the outreach worker. “If the goal is housing, this isn’t how we get there.”

Instead of expanding punitive policies, advocates are calling for permanent supportive housing, rental subsidies, and investment in health care and mental health services—solutions backed by decades of research and recommended by nearly every major public health authority.

As Los Angeles enters another summer without enough shelter beds, Park’s latest legislative push shows the city doubling down on a failed and deeply harmful approach. While the politics of enforcement may appeal to some constituents, the human and fiscal costs continue to grow.

“In a city with tens of thousands of unhoused people, we need real solutions—not criminalization dressed up as policy,” said Wong. “Housing ends homelessness. Sweeps do not.”