Newsom ties funds to homeless camp cleanup, legality challenged

Making good on a promise he made last summer, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday he would use bond funds and the state budget to reward local governments for clearing homeless encampments--or punish those that do not. If he follows through, it could set the stage for the next big court battle over bans against camping on the streets.

"I'm not interested anymore in funding failure," Newsom said during a news conference on Monday afternoon. "I want to see real results, and you'll see in my budget on Wednesday that we're going to hold the line."

The hourlong news conference began with Newsom and other officials announcing funding for new treatment beds and housing around the state. But it ended with aggressive talk about using state dollars to influence local government behavior.

The comments sounded much like ones he made in Los Angeles last summer. Speaking to reporters after helping crews clean up a former encampment, Newsom said, "If I don't see demonstrable results, I'll start to redirect money."

Those remarks came shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local laws against camping on public property do not violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, 2024 DJDAR 6000 (S. Ct., filed Aug. 22, 2023).

Earlier on Monday, Newsom's office released what it described as "a model ordinance for cities and counties to immediately address dangerous and unhealthy encampments and connect people experiencing homelessness with shelter and services." The announcement was paired "with the release of $3.3 billion in voter-approved Proposition 1 funding." Voters passed the initiative last year to provide $6.4 billion for housing and treatment facilities for people with mental health and substance abuse problems.

Perhaps not surprisingly, local governments welcomed the promise of funding--but not the strings attached.

"Cal Cities was pleased to hear this morning's announcement about the release of $3 billion in much-needed state funding to support behavioral health housing in communities throughout our state," said Carolyn Coleman, executive director and CEO of the League of California Cities, in an email. "But this funding, which was authorized by Proposition 1 and supported by cities, cannot be used to implement encampment ordinances."

Coleman did not directly respond to a question asking whether her organization would consider legal action. Anthony Prince, general counsel for the California Homeless Union/Statewide Organizing Council, was more direct.

"We questioned the legality, amongst other things, of the governor threatening to terminate or withhold funds that were approved by way of Proposition 1," he said.

Prince noted the Newsom administration filed an amicus curiae brief in the Grants Pass case, urging the justices to overturn an earlier decision protecting people from removal from the streets if they had nowhere to go. He said the governor has been making "knowingly false" statements exaggerating the scope of the justices' ruling in that case.

"Governor Newsom issued a public statement saying that with the Grants Pass decision, there are no further restrictions on cities," Prince said.

In fact, he added, there is still an open question whether other constitutional objections can still be raised against homeless sweeps. Prince pointed to a March ruling by U.S. District Judge Dena M. Coggins in favor of a woman who challenged her removal from her camp on 14th Amendment due process grounds. Alfred v. City of Vallejo, 2:24-cv-02993-DJC-AC (E.D. Cal., filed Oct. 31, 2024).

But other entities, including district attorneys' offices, have sued to force cities or others to enforce laws against public camping. Sacramento County District Attorney Thien Ho has been among the most active. Reached by email on Monday, Ho said Newsom had the right set of goals in mind.

"We are encouraged by the Governor's announcement and the proposed guidelines for using Prop. 1 funds," Ho said in an email. "These principles--prohibiting persistent camping, keeping sidewalks clear for public access, and requiring outreach and shelter offers before clearing encampments--are consistent with the approach I have long advocated for in Sacramento."

However, it remains to be seen if most cities and counties want to aggressively police "persistent camping," which has become a tool in many efforts to manage homeless populations. Some localities long tolerated encampments in one location--think Los Angeles' skid row--to stop them from spreading elsewhere.

In "The New Homelessness," a forthcoming article in the California Law Review, Mila Versteeg and Kevin L. Cope with the University of Virginia School of Law and Gaurav Mukherjee with the University of Connecticut argue that "sanctioned encampments" have become "the new face of homelessness." They argue that political realities will ensure "the socio-political institution's survival regardless of federal doctrine" despite the Grants Pass ruling.

"In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit's right-to-camp doctrine, and with it, the possibility of a nationwide right to camp on public land rooted in the Eighth Amendment," they wrote. "But we argue that the New Homelessness will nonetheless remain a fixture of American law and politics."