• Home
  • Crime
  • Local
    • Compton
    • Education
    • Inglewood
    • LA County
    • Long Beach
    • Los Angeles
    • Orange County
    • Riverside
    • San Bernardino County
    • South Bay
    • Sports
    • Ventura County
  • News
    • Business
    • California
    • Elections
      • Lifestyle
        • Health
        • Travel
    • Entertainment
    • Lottery
    • National
    • Real Estate
    • Transportation
    • World
  • Opinion
    • Letter to the Editor
    • Word on the Streets
  • Things to Do
    • Arts & Culture
    • Travel
  • Shop
    • Cart
  • About
    • Advertise
    • Mediakit

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

Facebook Twitter Instagram
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook Twitter Instagram
2UrbanGirls2UrbanGirls
  • Home
  • Crime
  • Local
    1. Compton
    2. Education
    3. Inglewood
    4. LA County
    5. Long Beach
    6. Los Angeles
    7. Orange County
    8. Riverside
    9. San Bernardino County
    10. South Bay
    11. Sports
    12. Ventura County
    13. View All

    Compton business owner seeks assistance after taco shop is vandalized

    June 11, 2025

    Man fatally shot in Compton

    June 11, 2025

    Compton woman’s sex trafficking hearing delayed

    June 11, 2025

    Gavin Newsom launches new statewide literacy program in Compton

    June 6, 2025

    Gavin Newsom launches new statewide literacy program in Compton

    June 6, 2025

    Former VP Kamala Harris surprises graduating Compton High School students

    June 5, 2025

    Long Beach Unified school aide facing child porn possession, distribution charges

    June 4, 2025

    California’s immigrant student population third-highest amid Trump visa freeze 

    May 29, 2025

    Inglewood to accept state grant funds for transit project, update Relocation Plan

    June 13, 2025

    Inglewood outsources City’s investment duties

    June 13, 2025

    Inglewood to schedule Public Hearing July 8 to rezone vacant lot across from Metro K Line on La Colina Drive

    June 13, 2025

    Anti-ICE protest held in Inglewood

    June 12, 2025

    Sheriff’s oversight commissioner says he is being ‘forced out’ by County Supervisor Kathryn Barger

    June 11, 2025

    Why Are 80% of LA County Probation employees not showing up at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall?

    June 5, 2025

    Inglewood nonprofit exec named to county governance task force

    May 30, 2025

    DA declines to charge former probation officials with sexual abuse

    May 30, 2025

    Man shot while sitting in his car in Long Beach

    June 13, 2025

    1 killed in two-vehicle crash in Long Beach

    June 11, 2025

    Driver killed after speeding, crashing into wall in Long Beach

    June 9, 2025

    Authorities ID motorcyclist killed after crashing into vehicle in Long Beach

    June 4, 2025

    California senator forcibly removed from Secretary Kristi Noem’s LA press conference

    June 12, 2025

    GRID Alternatives Greater Los Angeles’ FREE Solar Clinic this Saturday, June 14

    June 12, 2025

    Immigrant focused non-profit denies funding LA protests

    June 11, 2025

    Federal agents involved in Boyle Heights crash deny hit-and-run allegations

    June 11, 2025

    Black woman sues Disney alleging disrcimination

    June 9, 2025

    Prosecutors announce additional federal indictments attached to former OC Supervisor Andrew Do

    June 6, 2025

    OC businessman slapped with wage theft charges

    June 5, 2025

    3 Riverside men charged with shooting man in Newport Beach

    June 4, 2025

    SoCal transgender athlete in spotlight after Trump threatens to withhold federal funding from California

    May 30, 2025

    Winning SuperLotto Plus lottery ticket sold in Riverside County

    May 17, 2025

    5 people stabbed at Riverside sober living residence

    May 12, 2025

    Men arrested for armed robberies of postal carriers in L.A., Riverside counties

    April 4, 2025

    School police officers caught in middle of fight at SoCal high school

    April 25, 2025

    Police shooting leaves man hospitalized in San Bernardino

    April 6, 2025

    Teen shot in deputy-involved shooting in San Bernardino County

    February 25, 2025

    SoCal lawmaker introduces legislation to expand police use of drones

    February 24, 2025

    South Bay nonprofit leader sentenced to prison for COVID-19 fraud related charges

    June 9, 2025

    South Bay soccer coach arrested for attempted sex crime against minor

    June 4, 2025

    Authorities ID man found on South Bay freeway embankment

    June 2, 2025

    Torrance police continue to cite drivers for distracted driving

    May 29, 2025

    SoCal transgender athlete in spotlight after Trump threatens to withhold federal funding from California

    May 30, 2025

    South Bay high school football team banned from post-season play for 3 years

    April 24, 2025

    L.A. committee approves moving some 2028 Olympics events to Inglewood

    March 26, 2025

    Compton, Long Beach school districts form association to enhance athletics programs

    March 25, 2025

    5 injured by wrong-way driver on 101 Freeway in Ventura

    April 27, 2025

    SoCal mayor announces bid for Assembly District 42 seat

    April 2, 2025

    SoCal lawmaker introduces legislation to expand police use of drones

    February 24, 2025

    Teen killed by ax wielding man in Ventura County

    December 6, 2024

    How to ‘Get Notified’ about Inglewood traffic delays and street closures

    June 13, 2025

    Road rage leads to woman intentionally driving into ambulance

    June 13, 2025

    California senator forcibly removed from Secretary Kristi Noem’s LA press conference

    June 12, 2025

    Anti-ICE protest held in Inglewood

    June 12, 2025
  • News
    • Business
    • California
    • Elections
      • Lifestyle
        • Health
        • Travel
    • Entertainment
    • Lottery
    • National
    • Real Estate
    • Transportation
    • World
  • Opinion
    • Letter to the Editor
    • Word on the Streets
  • Things to Do
    • Arts & Culture
    • Travel
  • Shop
    • Cart
  • About
    • Advertise
    • Mediakit
2UrbanGirls2UrbanGirls
Home»Local»Follow the Money: Homeless Industrial Complex in L.A. County
Local

Follow the Money: Homeless Industrial Complex in L.A. County

2UrbanGirlsBy 2UrbanGirlsApril 25, 2022Updated:April 8, 20258 Comments3 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Groundbreaking ceremony for Fairview Heights affordable housing complex in Inglewood, CA, where residents can earn in excess of $100,000 and still be income eligible. (Credit: National CORE)
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

LOS ANGELES – In politics the phrase “follow the money” is uttered when questionable situations arise when millions in taxpayer dollars are shelled out with little to nothing to show for it.

In 2016, Los Angeles taxpayers overwhelmingly approved Measure HHH, a $1.2 billion bond, to address the rising homeless numbers produced through annual “homeless count” surveys.

The media got on board with providing nonstop coverage of nonprofits seeking to “perform the work”, and in those photo ops, they stood proudly next to elected officials, spearheading the measure’s passage.

Measure HHH was championed by Mayor Eric Garcetti, and co-written by LA Councilmembers Jose Huizar and Marqueece Harris-Dawson.

Harris-Dawson described HHH as:

“A measure on the L.A. city ballot to fund a bond to build 10,000 units of permanent supportive housing and provide several million dollars for affordable housing in the city of Los Angeles. “

The measure proposed to house 13,000 people, despite data released six months before the November vote by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, the homeless population rose by 6 percent in L.A. County to 46, 874. The same census also found that the number of homeless women increased by 55 percent between 2013 and 2016. 

How was $1.2 billion enough?

In fact, data shows that between 2010 to 2019, the number of homeless increased by 39%, while pay to executives/directors of nonprofits charged with performing the work, increased by 104%.

According to the City of Los Angeles, in 2016, the cost of one of the housing units is about $350,000. On average the City will finance about a third of each unit. Also, once the tenant has moved in, the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA) provides vouchers to help with rent and some operating costs. When able, the tenant pays 30 to 40 percent of their gross monthly income on rent. 

The costs per door rose to a staggering $800,000 per door, with a new housing complex set to open in Venice, if approved, with costs of up to $1 million per door.

Then Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas took $250,000 from his Mark Ridley-Thomas Committee for a Better L.A., to put towards the measure passing. This is the same campaign account used to make a dubious contribution to USC on behalf of his son Sebastian.

In return, Ridley-Thomas received $84,343, which was from contractors, for profit and nonprofit, and the contractors’ employees, who received money from Measure H. 

The “homeless industrial complex” involves over a 100 nonprofits, and contractors, who are raising their salaries faster than the housing they are supposed to be building, and the shelters they are to be providing.

Next up? 

A closer look at the salaries and objectives of the nonprofits charged with addressing the homeless crisis, on behalf of LA County under Measure H.

Related

homeless count LA County Measure HHH Proposition HHH
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
2UrbanGirls
  • Twitter

2UrbanGirls has been cited in Daily Breeze, Daily News, Inglewood Today, Intersections South LA, KCRW, KPCC, Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Wave, LA Weekly, LA Watts Times, Mercury News, New York Times, Orange County Register, Sports Illustrated, The Atlantic, and Washington Post. Former contributor to CityWatchLA.

Related Posts

How to ‘Get Notified’ about Inglewood traffic delays and street closures

June 13, 2025

Road rage leads to woman intentionally driving into ambulance

June 13, 2025

Man dies from injuries after being shot in Lancaster

June 13, 2025
View 8 Comments

8 Comments

  1. Homelessness has become one very well funded “business opportunity”..... on April 27, 2022 10:14 am

    Yes indeed “following the money” is usually the best way to see who is really benefiting…hint….not usually the group being celebrated as the beneficiaries.

    The causes of homelessnss are many and yet we seem to only hear when the money is being given away it is to consultants/developers that tell us it costs them more than to build each low income housing unit than the average housing with out grant money costs.

    .Let’s get real often those Grant receiving units are placed in low income areas on land which has laid vacant for years due to the land banking of redevelopment perhaps as early as the 1980’s when minimum wage as $3.10 per hour…NO ONE WENT BACK AND PAID THOSE FORMER PROPERTY OWNERS OR EVICTED TENANTS DISPLACED BY EMINENT DOMAIN A NEWER UPGRADED RATE….those “acquisition fees” were by today’s standards are insignificant, the myriad of consultants and attorneys and specialists are often paid far more in compensation than the building supplies and actual laborers involved in the construction.

    To suggest that these new affordable units are held to a (music in the background) “higher standard” is simply laughable….Are we seriously to believe that the HHH funded units will have “HIGHER END” TOILETS AND KITCHEN SINKS than the new condos being sold for over a million..
    uuhuh… and the flooring paint and electrical wires cost more also because…? what the component parts vendor says oh look affordable unit contracts let’s charge more for that 2×4…..right ……all because the “now homeless person” couldn’t possibly maintain life in the housing most first time or senior owners do…..? We wouldn’t want the homeless to live as poorly as those paying for New none “sustainable homes” would we?

    Until we get campaign contributors out of the mix (ie not allow any consultants/contractor connected to receiving tax payer money in the near future 5/10 years from donating to political campaigns) we will continue to pay dearly for TAJ MAHAL priced edifices that would never be so costly if not for the expectations that tax-payers are footing the construction bill, and paying future rental subsidies.

    Anyone think this is an exaggeration look back at the Wendy Gruel audit of Housing Authority of City Los Angeles – those guilty of lavish spending of tax dollars and compromised favoritisms may not be in HACLA…, but many did not stop living well off of tax payers- they simply changed cities and took their corrupt ways with them.

    Loading...
    Reply
    • JO on April 28, 2022 4:20 pm

      Similar to the original editorial, your comments are rife with generalizations about affordable housing that are incorrect. For example, the idea that consultants and developers are necessarily the direct recipients of these monies is incorrect. Most special needs projects such as those funded by HHH are awarded Federal LIHTCs from the state tax credit allocation committee. The regulations limit the developer fee that can be earned by a developer/sponsor. Admittedly, this does not necessarily limit fees paid to consultants; however, as any developer will tell you – they would rather be paid to get units built rather than overpay consultants and never get the units built. It’s just common sense. There is no question that there are many units developed in areas that are needy in terms of capital investment. But with the enhanced enforcement of the Surplus Land Act (see recent Anaheim Angels case), jurisdictions are required to offer land assets for affordable development before other uses. Capitalized costs for land are limited to what they appraise for (without a waiver), and by purchasing land at a value higher than it is worth makes it more difficult to get a project awarded tax credits. Again – it would make no sense.

      The biggest variable in any development project is not soft costs for consultants etc. It is construction costs. The statement that consultants are making more than the prevailing wage increase (or the cost of construction) on projects is simply false. For example, a recent project had a construction budget of over $17 million. Assuming a 20% premium for payment of prevailing wages, this is about $3.4MM. Developing an affordable project (or any development project) will require the services of a myriad of specialized design engineering and other professionals. For this particular project of 70 units located in Southern California, the costs for these services was less than $2.7MM.

      To the average person, the idea that affordable units are held to a higher standard is “laughable.” Again, I don’t disagree – but that does not change the fact that it is true. It is not that the fixtures and finishes are more costly, it is that things like increased insulation in wall assemblies or architectural features that achieve passive shading to hit elevated Title 24 requirements that cost more money. Again, not necessarily things the public could see or appreciate; however, they are present in affordable developments. Your flippant comment about a 2×4 costing more because it is in an affordable deal is sadly not far off the truth in one respect – subs do charge a markup due to the nuisance that the compliance requirements of a prevailing wage job adds. Remember, many public sources require the payment of prevailing wages. It has nothing to do with the population being housed and everything to do with the imposition and requirements of prevailing wage programs. See my previous comments about politicians and special interests.

      All of that said, I agree with your premise that we need campaign finance reform. In that, we can both agree. Money does move politics in the current political system, which affects the affordable housing industry. Without speaking to the qualifications of Rick Caruso, his personal fortune has allowed him unprecedented media coverage in the City of LA mayoral race. Looking back at the original premise of the editorial- I guess I don’t object too much to that premise. My objection is to incorrect assertions about an industry that I love. Affordable housing marries the economic interests of private industry with housing goals/needs of local communities and advocates. Developers are paid a fee to construct affordable projects that allows them to cover their costs and earn a profit. On an IRR basis, it is well short of what their market rate peers would earn. Coupled with the guarantees that a developer must provide should a project have operating deficits or are not capitalized such that they can complete the construction, these are some of the other reasons a developer is paid a fee to produce what is without question, an asset in the community. There is a reason the larger, institutional developers don’t play in this sandbox – there are easier ways to make a buck!

      The statement questioning CEO compensation does not ask the relevant question: what is their compensation relative to their industry peers in multifamily development? Having also worked for a multifamily REIT in my career, I can tell you that the executives from affordable developers are earning less than their for profit, market rate counterparts. This is proved out b/c executive compensation at the nonprofits cited in the editorial are limited by a salary survey, or risk losing their tax exempt, IRS status. Another prohibition is these nonprofits are prohibited from making political donations by the IRS – though admittedly individuals working at an organization are allowed to make personal donations, and I know many do.

      In my over 20 years in the affordable industry, I have seen developers as generally a pragmatic lot. The imposition of prevailing wages and elevated sustainability requirements are seen as policy goals for affordable housing to advance, which drives up costs. Do you think a developer would voluntarily ask for things that make projects harder to finance? The project cited in Venice further underscores that when projects are located in higher income areas as the current tax credit program advantages, then land costs are elevated vis-a-vis other market rate projects. And citing an audit of a public agency is not an indictment of affordable developers, rather of entrenched bureaucracies with a lack of transparency and oversight.

      The affordable housing industry is far from perfect. I will be the first to acknowledge that. However, any discussion should be based on facts and not gross generalizations.

      In summary:

      1) It is not developers and consultants that are driving up the $/unit to develop affordable housing. It is other special interests that have a larger impact on the costs to produce affordable housing.
      2) It does not make sense for developers to add costs and requirements that would make it more difficult to build affordable housing.
      3) Larger policy goals such as location, sustainability, or prevailing wages do increase the cost to produce affordable housing (their intrinsic positives notwithstanding)
      4) Affordable housing developers make less and and deal with more regulations and other headaches than their market rate peers

      *mic drop*

      Loading...
      Reply
      • 2UrbanGirls on April 28, 2022 4:40 pm

        City’s with their own charter are NOT required to contract with companies paying prevailing wage on construction projects.

        Loading...
        Reply
        • JO on April 28, 2022 4:48 pm

          That is true – however, the State or County sources of funding require payment of prevailing wages.

          Loading...
          Reply
      • herbert castillo on February 24, 2023 5:25 am

        The problems of homelessness is not fix, for so many reasons and excuses but for most of us is obvious that the money is not going for fixing the problem. While the homelessness increases so do the salaries of the management teams behind the NON profits. Denied That.

        Loading...
        Reply
    • Vedi Sadler on May 23, 2022 11:36 pm

      Truely its all a scam!!! I currently reside in PRK and have witnessed the way people suit up come to work and dont get dirty. Taxpayer monies get doled out at an astounding rate but none of those funds go to the intended the beneficiaries get no service the bring in peoe with one foot in tbe grave and believe the ambulance and fire dept. Are here daily i can not say how many bodies are removed but for every one removed means they can validate more funding this is known as double dipping like a revolving door on Taxpayer mo ies this crestes an excessof funds that wind up spent erroneously. That is just the tip of the iceberg as a fiduciary the salvation Army working through lasha do not properly train its administrative personnel in a way that they understand the scope of thier authority. Meaning the clients ( PAITIENTS BENEFISCIARYS WHATEVER) are being short changed due to the lack of training. I have also witnessed the poor system of handling property beloning to those exited from tbe program items are taken willy nilly as rooms are entered without supervision and at the descretion oc the unsupervised usurper removed or consumed by that floor worker even the cleaning personel have taken items from rooms they are charged to clean. I have a friend who was remanded to county while attempting to do the right thing in an effort to get her life back on track and when she was released all ber personal belongings had allegedly been donated this i find hard to believe they (PRK) was informed of her situation yet made no effirt to hile her prioerty or as a nationwuxe organization stand for her to say this is one of our flocj and ask she be placed in our custody. Upon her release the administration would not stand up fir her after thier poor handling of her personal property they turned this woman in her fifties. Out to the streets. But the are helping the homeless. Everybody is making a profit off the taxpayers while lying to all of us saying they are here to help. Its laughable to the point of crying all of those we have elected are selling out “we the people” its time the people take back the power placed in the hands of the elected set up and iversite co .ity to check those that monies are entrusted to and make sure those earmarked for those funds get the benefit they have been allotted.

      Loading...
      Reply
  2. JO on April 25, 2022 4:03 pm

    Full disclosure: I work in the affordable housing sector and have been involved in the development of nearly 12,000 rental units in my career. While I don’t disagree that money moves politics, what I do not agree with is the simplistic terms with which this editorial characterizes the development of affordable housing. What is not considered in this overly simplified math is the myriad of policy priorities that are advanced using the affordable housing program both statewide as well as locally. For example, did you know that affordable housing developments must meet more strict sustainability guidelines than market rate developments. Some might argue that sustainability creates cost savings over the term of ownership – and they would not be wrong. However, those sustainability measures must be paid for upfront, driving up costs that must be capitalized now, not in the future. Of course, labor has to get involved in any public program so accepting funds from State HCD or CalHFA typically involves the payment of prevailing wages and adds 20% or more to the construction costs of a project. Surprise, surprise! HHH funded projects have a prevailing wage requirement! These are two examples of politicians carrying water for special interests that would otherwise challenge affordable housing funding and/or projects. Elevated costs are not solely due to politicians and entities that line their pockets; a current policy goal is to place affordable development in areas with higher resources. That is to say a project is advantaged if it is located in an area that has higher socioeconomics than those that are not, with the premise being that the residents will benefit from the schools and other community amenities that might be lacking in lower income areas. Naturally, the land cost in these areas is also higher and thereby artificially making the $/unit for these developments higher vs their market rate peers that are unrestricted in their site selection. Bottom line: editorials such as this provide sensational numbers without any depth of analysis. The affordable housing industry is far from perfect; however, it is a remarkable intersection of public and private interests that leads to the production of housing that can transform communities and the lives of residents who live there.

    Loading...
    Reply
    • Gilberto on February 9, 2023 9:50 pm

      I read both of your comments, yet the common denominator or variable which is human lives prevails in conditions that are scandalous as well the deterioration of the city and vicinity.
      If in both cases, there are viable solutions why we still have the issue? I have been a resident of LA for the past thirty-five years. It has worsened to be honest with you. let’s stop pointing fingers and act in changing the rhetoric of what our city is becoming.

      Loading...
      Reply

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Sign up for our E-Newsletter!
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube TikTok
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Privacy Policy
© 2025 2UrbanGirls. All rights reserved.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

%d