LA misled opponents in homeless case, federal judge says

A federal judge suggested he will rule that the City of Los Angeles has not been meeting its deadlines under a nearly 2-year-old agreement to provide more shelter space to homeless people in the county.

During a hearing Thursday, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter told a plaintiff’s attorney representing the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights that she was misled by the city last year over promises of contracting plans that were not fulfilled by specific deadlines pursuant to the agreement.

“I would find that you were misled in this matter,” Carter told Elizabeth A. Mitchell of Umhofer Mitchell & King LLP. “I will not have this agreement broken.”

In 2020, the coalition sued the city on claims its leaders weren’t doing enough to address the homelessness crisis and declutter street encampments. The parties settled in 2022 and the city agreed to build provide than 5,000 shelter beds and reduce encampments by specific district-by-district deadlines. However, Mitchell said the city has not been fulfilling those requirements for the past 14 months. L.A. Alliance for Human Rights et al. v. City of Los Angeles et al., 2:20-cv-02291 (C.D. Cal., Mar. 10, 2020).

Carter heard the coalition plaintiff’s motion for settlement agreement compliance Thursday and said the city – specifically Mercedes Márquez, the former chief of the Los Angeles Housing Department – was in the wrong.

“It would seem to the court that I would then, in writing an opinion, find that you were misled from March 15 minimally through Oct. 16, Ms. Mitchell, by Mercedes Márquez in terms of the representations made to you,” Carter said.

In a phone interview Friday, Mitchell said Márquez told her during a meeting last March that she planned to hire several outreach contractors to meet specific proposal deadlines of the agreement’s encampment removal sections. However, the plans were never proposed to the alliance until Jan. 31, Mitchell said.

“When it finally came into compliance, and during those 14 months, there were a series of negotiations and promises that were made by the city that the city failed to follow through with,” Mitchell said. “As a result of that, the court found that the city acted in bad faith, or at least indicated that it would find the city acted in bad faith and misled the plaintiffs.”

The city is represented by Los Angeles City Attorney Scott D. Marcus. A communications officer for the city attorney’s office, Ivor Pine, said in an email: “We don’t comment on pending litigation.”

According to a transcript of the hearing, Mitchell and Marcus signed a stipulation of facts that agreed Márquez’s promises were not fulfilled pursuant to the agreement.

Carter did not issue a ruling Thursday. He said he would continue the hearing a week to include input from Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. He said that during a phone call, Bass agreed to “transparency and accountability concerning the invoices and the underlying work documents for services … and future agreements concerning homelessness.”

Mitchell said that hearing date is tentatively scheduled for March 18.

In response to potential penalties that could be filed against the city’s attorneys, Marcus told Carter, “Your Honor, the city is stipulating to those facts but not to the legal effect of those facts and whether those facts should result in any sanction to the city.” He also requested the opportunity to provide additional arguments if the court required it.

Carter did not give Marcus the chance to argue, but addressed both parties on how sanctions could be argued in future hearings. “You have a chance on either side to call witnesses to bolster your record, to cross examine. Otherwise, I’ve given you a fairly tentative feeling about this matter, and that is you were misled by the city,” Carter said.