As the Los Angeles County assessor I rarely comment publicly on matters that are outside of my jurisdiction. However, I am going to make an exception to that practice as it relates to the proposed establishment of a county department for homeless services.
The issue of homelessness is one of the most important issues that we face today. There have been many efforts to find solutions and we have invested billions in efforts to reduce homelessness. Unfortunately, we are far from making the progress that we need.
A recent audit of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) revealed a number of financial deficiencies. In response, Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Kathryn Barger have proposed creating a county department of homeless services within the county. This is a proposal that I enthusiastically endorse. Here’s why:
In local government, and with many other government agencies, the standard method to providing various services is through specialized departments managed by experienced administrators and staffed by experts in the primary discipline of that department. We do this for police, parks, roads, public health and every other public service that you can think of.
Conversely, as it relates to homeless services, we have relied on an unconventional and complex governance structure that has not met our expectations, and probably can’t.
Neither the county nor city of Los Angeles have a department dedicated to homeless services. Historically, they have appointed a high-level executive who is empowered to work across multiple departments and to draw on personnel and resources. Often times this individual is housed with the mayor or the CEO giving that individual access to government at the highest level. There is a certain logic to this approach, but I don’t think it is the best approach.
A conventional department is focused solely on its primary mission and is structured to achieve that mission. But in the case of the high-level executive, part of their job is to work with other department heads to allocate some of their limited personnel and resources to another purpose – homeless services. This arrangement sets-up competing interests for limited resources.
Another feature that has been employed is the establishment of a third-party agency in which multiple government agencies delegate certain authority. In Los Angeles, that is LAHSA. LAHSA responds to a mayor, 15 City Council members, five county supervisors and a plethora of other stakeholders. While there is a certain logic to having a collaborative multi-agency partnership, it remains that when everybody is in charge, nobody is in charge.
As the elected administrator of a major government agency for 10 years, my experience leads me to believe that a more conventional government structure, one that everyone is familiar with, is a more understood and reliable approach to the delivery of homeless services.
The executives appointed at the city and county, while very well-placed and with significant authority, lack the depth of resources that a conventional government department is imbued with.
There is virtually no other major government service need that is met with such a complex, hybrid approach. Creating a department of homeless services is not a panacea for success, but it at least applies the standard administrative method that is successfully used for so many other government service needs, and I believe that this tried and true structure is more likely to be successful.
Jeffrey Prang is Los Angeles County assessor.