Downtown Skid Row, October 2011

Skid Row occupies less than a square mile of downtown Los Angeles; yet it has become a major battleground in the struggle between the forces of gentrification and the low-income residents they are trying to push out.  LAFLA is firmly in the camp of these residents and LA CAN (Los Angeles Community Action Network), the community organization that represents them.  The purpose of this edition is to let you know the real story about who lives in Skid Row and what is happening in this highly contested piece of real estate.

Corner of 5th and Main streets after the "downtown renaissance."

The first thing you need to know is that the majority of Skid Row residents are neither homeless nor transient.  Many have lived there for years.  The community began to grow when the railroads were built along the Los Angeles River in the 1870’s.  Single Room Occupancy Hotels (SROs) with small rooms and communal baths were created to house the transient, mostly male, population that came to LA for short-term or seasonal work.  Some of the social service organizations currently found in the area began as organizations serving the temporary population with support that people away from home needed. 

There was a great migration of people to the area during the depression of the 30s, in large part because of the hotels and social service agencies.  During World War II, the area evolved into a stopping place for people who were working in the war industries or being shipped off to the Pacific.  New organizations catering to military personnel sprang up.  Many of today’s small theatres, bookstores, and cafes have roots in this era.  Because Los Angeles was segregated in the 40s, the area in which African Americans could live were limited to the Skid Row area, some other parts of downtown, Watts, and a very few other communities, so many who came to Los Angeles from the South to work settled on Skid Row.

After World War II, the area evolved from being primarily comprised of commercial hotels for a transient but working population to one that provided more long-term places for people to live at the lowest levels of income and affordability.   

In 1975, the Los Angeles City Council adopted a redevelopment plan designed to prevent the area from succumbing to the fate of Bunker Hill, where the residents were removed and housing razed to make way for skyscrapers and the "downtown renaissance."  Instead, the Skid Row area was to be "contained" and "stabilized" for its poor residents through concentration of services like detox programs and shelters and the establishment of light industry that could offer employment for those on the street.  Housing was to be preserved and expanded.  The California Redevelopment Agency of Los Angeles (CRA/LA) acquired, rehabilitated and sold a number of the SRO hotels to nonprofit organizations. 

 In 1977, a lawsuit placed a cap on the amount of tax money that could be spent on redeveloping the area.  By 1998 almost 50 percent of the housing stock had been rehabilitated for Skid Row’s low-income residents.  But also by that time, the spending cap had almost been reached, and with increasing interest in downtown development, the City and the CRA tried various ways to get around the cap.  In 2001, they proposed an amendment to the original redevelopment plan based on a slight redrawing of the boundaries, which, they argued, eliminated the cap.  It was adopted in May of 2002 with only minimal community involvement.

Attorney Nicole Perez helps client on Skid Row--"other side" of 5th & Main streets.

Because the amended plan neglected the interest of low-income Skid Row residents-failing to assure affordable replacement housing, failing to provide for relocation assistance and seeking to curtail the concentration of social service agencies-LAFLA sued to stop its implementation with residents of SRO hotels, the Los Angeles Coalition to End Hunger and Homelessness and two individual residential hotel tenants serving as plaintiffs.  At trial court the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the city appealed.  The case was remanded back to the trial court.  LAFLA’s clients settled with the CRA/LA.  The settlement ("Wiggins Settlement") preserves all existing residential hotel units downtown, requiring replacement of any converted or demolished units, a no net loss policy for all residential units, and a local hiring plan to provide job opportunities to Skid Row residents.  Over the next several years LAFLA and LA CAN were forced to file seven lawsuits against individual resident hotels for such illegal practices as displacement without relocation and slum conditions.

In addition to litigation, LAFLA, LA CAN, and other partners, created a strategy that would force city agencies to recognize persons residing in residential hotels as tenants rather than transients, which would afford them a number of protections, such as the right to the eviction process and relocation benefits.  The next step was getting then City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo to crack down on the 28-day shuffle (the practice of making tenants leave after 28 days to avoid establishing a tenancy).  In 2008, he sued the owners of the Frontier and Rosslyn hotels, crediting LAFLA and LA CAN with making his suit possible.  The settlement resulted in relocation fees for the residents who the owners had required to leave the Frontier Hotel in addition to penalties paid to the city.

LAFLA and LA CAN succeeded in persuading the City Council to pass a city-wide ordinance to preserve residential hotel units by requiring replacement units for any units that are converted or demolished.  This ordinance recognized that the Wiggins Agreement gave more protections to downtown residential hotels and residents.

Unfortunately, these successes caused the forces of gentrification to turn to other means of getting the residents to leave.  Mayor Villaraigosa and former Police Chief William Bratton came up with the Safer Cities Initiative (see article below provided by LA CAN & study by LAFLA board member Gary Blasi), and declaration of Skid Row resident), which under the guise of making the area safer, has targeted low-income residents of Skid Row by plaguing them with infraction citations.  Though the SCI has caused no end of grief for the residents, it has actually strengthened their resolve to stay.  There is a feeling of camaraderie and common purpose that is almost palpable as residents come and go from the storefront and strong base of support provided by LA CAN. 

Senior Attorney and Housing Litigator Barbara Schultz Talks about her Work on Skid Row & the Way Forward

The most important source of housing in Skid Row is residential hotels. In 2003, I wrote a Daily Journal editorial about the need to preserve and improve this housing of last resort that was very much under attack by gentrification efforts, including a new downtown redevelopment plan by the Community Redevelopment Agency.

Since that time LAFLA, and its partner the Los Angeles Community Action Network (LA CAN), has successfully organized and advocated for two important preservation policies and litigated a number of cases affecting individual hotels. The first policy stems from litigation challenging the redevelopment area and resulted in a settlement agreement ("Wiggins Settlement") which preserves all existing residential hotel units downtown, requiring replacement of any converted or demolished units, a no net loss policy for all residential units, and a local hiring plan providing job opportunities to Skid Row residents. The second policy is the residential hotel preservation ordinance, while not as strong as the Wiggins Settlement, grants protection to all residential hotels in the city of Los Angeles.

A key to our success was forcing policy makers to recognize that residential hotels were sources of permanent housing, and its occupants were tenants, not transients.   A myth that has been more difficult to dispel is who actually lives in Skid Row.  Policies such as the Safer Cities Initiative (SCI) serve to enforce a negative, one-dimensional view of both the community at large and its residents. A popular LA Times columnist recently wrote a story about riding along with SCI police officers. She reported on the world she apparently saw through the officer’s eyes and described it as a "stew of addictions, mental illness and criminal intent that keeps bubbling up in a no-man’s land." It’s little wonder that the police, city attorney and politicians support policies that dehumanize residents if that’s their world view.  In my experience of working with LA CAN, I see a diverse, though mostly African-American, community that has historic roots in the area, is willing and able to fight for self-determination, and is forced to combat daily the racism and classicism that permeates our society, our laws, and our economy.  While there are a great many homeless folks in Skid Row there are many more living in residential hotels. Many Skid Row residents are disabled, many are veterans, some are addicts, some are raising families. Some work, some cannot. Like any other community there’s no one-size-fits-all description. The demographics in a recent UCLA survey of Skid Row residents found that 60 percent were African-American, 14 percent Caucasian, almost 11 percent Latino. Almost 70 percent were male and the average age was 52. Almost half of these individuals live in permanent housing. Nearly three-quarters of respondents reported a physical and/or mental disability.

The Way Forward

By Barbara Schultz

In terms of housing policies needed in Skid Row-some are unique to the area but most are the same as poor tenants throughout our city.

First and foremost Skid Row tenants need some relief in the form of long-held off reforms to the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO). The RSO is a crucial tool in preserving affordable housing.  City Council commissioned a million dollar study of the RSO and in 2009 the Los Angeles Economic Roundtable reported on their findings: RSO tenants were rent-burdened while RSO landlords were getting a better return than the national average. The Economic Roundtable recommended several changes including abolishing the contrived rent increase floor. Because utilities are included in the rent, residential hotel tenants are subject to a minimum five percent rent increase each year-even when the Consumer Price Index is far lower (since the RSO was passed in 1979, the CPI was 5 percent or higher only six years, the last time was 1991). The other reform greatly needed by hotel tenants is to abolish the extra 2 percent increase for utilities; the Economic Roundtable study found absolutely no connection between the percentage rent increase and the actual price of utilities. Despite spending a million dollars on this study City Council has refused to act upon the recommendations.

Second, Skid Row residents need an end to SCI.  Jaywalking walking tickets, if not dealt with, can lead to arrest warrants, which can lead to a loss of housing, which in turn destabilizes individuals and families. For example one individual whom LA CAN interviewed said that he was arrested for an outstanding warrant for failure to appear on a jaywalking ticket when SCI first began in 2006. He was sent to jail for 90 days and as a result he lost his Section 8 voucher and his General Relief. He remained homeless for four years.  Another individual  who was in jail for two weeks for a failure to appear lost his housing, his benefits, and had to wait three months to reschedule his missed mental health appointments. He also became homeless. On days when SCI is in full mobilization, the community feels besieged, not safe. We need policies that promote stability and integrate residents, not ensnare them. SCI has earned Los Angeles the dubious title of one of America’s "meanest cities" by the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty and also a mention in a United Nations report on racism in the United States in 2009.

Third, we need policies that target extremely low income housing opportunities.  For years the City’s housing authority, HACLA has had an unwritten policy refusing to grant Skid Row housing developers new project-based Section 8 vouchers in a misguided attempt to "de-concentrate poverty."  A couple projects were awarded recently but it’s unclear if this is a policy reversal or an exception.  These subsidies are the difference between making a project pencil out or not for a developer who targets the truly neediest people. Other subsidies, such as state tax credits, don’t go deep enough to house those under 30% median of income-which is just about anyone living on any form of public benefits (SSI, GR, CalWORKs). Federal, state and local affordable housing policies should target the lowest income tenants if we want to end, or even stop the increase, in homelessness.

Last, numerous studies have shown that supportive permanent housing is the best, most cost-effective way  to house chronically homeless  individuals. In (another) Economic Roundtable Study called "Where We Sleep: The Costs of Housing and Homelessness in Los Angeles" it concluded that the typical public costs for a tenant in supportive housing was $605 a month, whereas the typical cost for a similar homeless person was $2,897. Supportive housing is a humane, cost-efficient solution to homelessness that needs to be put into practice on a greater scale. 

"The Safer Cities Initiative: Five years of Criminalization, Injustice, and Community Resistance"

By LA CAN

"The Safer City Initiative (SCI) is a critical component of our strategy to reduce homelessness in this City. We will be targeting the drug dealers and other criminals that prey on the homeless to reverse the culture of lawlessness on Skid Row, while leading those who need help to housing and services."

Shortly after this statement, made by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on September 24, 2006, L.A.’s Skid Row became home to the largest concentration of police officers in the country. Since its inception five years ago, the SCI has ushered in an era of policing unseen before in Los Angeles - one that brought 50 additional uniformed officers and up to 60 undercover agents to an area smaller than one square-mile.

Accordingtoits creators, Villaraigosa and then-Police Chief William Bratton, SCI was to use a two-pronged approach of increased policing and social services that would result in a significant reduction in crime and homelessness in the community. It would also implement a "broken windows" strategy of crime reduction, which maintains that a reduction in "visible signs of disorder" - such as broken windows, trash on the streets, or jaywalking - eventually leads to a decrease in drug dealing, homicides, and other forms of serious crime.

Unfortunately, this theory has never been proven as an effective means of crime or poverty reduction. And what followed was a particularly aggressive and brutal system of mass arrests, citations, and harassment. 

According to data gathered by UCLA Law Professor Gary Blasi, in the first two years of SCI alone, LAPD made over 19,000 arrests and issued roughly 24,000 citations. This is in a community with a population of approximately 12,000 - 15,000 residents. This amount of ticketing and arrests was unique to Skid Row, and represented a level unlike any other in Los Angeles. In fact, a 2007 UCLA study found that the number of citations issued in the first year of SCI came at a rate up to 69 times higher than those found in other parts of a city already notorious for intense police activity.

As if this was not bad enough, a disturbing pattern of bias policing began to surface. Homeless and low-income residents, predominately black and brown, realized that while they were being stopped for jaywalking, tossing a cigarette butt on the ground, crossing against a red light, or having an open container, newer, wealthier, and whiter residents were not being stopped for the same violations.

These types of violations came with-if not arrest and jail time-financial penalties of at least $159 - $191. This left those cited, many of whom live off fixed incomes between $221 and $850 a month, often unable to pay monetary penalties. This in turn resulted in a fine increase (up to $600), a suspended license, and/or a warrant for arrest. For many, it also led to a loss of benefits, housing, jobs, and services.

To help address the urgent issue, LA CAN, the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA), and other pro bono legal partners began to provide representation for infraction citations as part of a weekly free legal clinic. What was learned was that the impacts of SCI went far beyond just citations. Reports of various forms of police misconduct - harassment, arbitrary stops, unwarranted searches, illegal property seizure and destruction - began to pour in from residents.

There were also multiple accounts of physically-disabled residents receiving crosswalk violation citations as a result of their inability to cross an intersection in sufficient time due to their use of wheelchairs, walkers, and canes. In 2009, of the over 600 tickets handled by the legal clinic, 90 percent were for crosswalk violations and jaywalking. Among those that reported their disability status, 60 percent were people with disabilities.

But the story of SCI has not simply been one of injustice, displacement, and civil rights violations. Over the past 5 years, local residents have built a resistance and movement that is bent on changing the culture of criminalization that LAPD has created and, ultimately, eliminating the Safer Cities Initiative.

What started with meetings, testimonials, and protest signs has led to a multi-cultural, community-wide effort that combines, amongst other tools, organizing, police monitoring, community research and lawyering, documentary film-making, Know Your Rights trainings, policy advocacy, and leadership development.

While SCI remains an oppressive and racist program that must come to an end, Skid Row residents and their allies have organized resistance to the policy and have achieved some victories for the community.

After residents helped gather declarations and video evidence, in the Spring of 2007 a federal judge found that some of LAPD’s search policies were unconstitutional, and they were ordered to stop those, reducing the number of detentions with searches in the community.

Community Watch teams of trained community residents monitor the police department on a daily basis, reducing the likelihood of civil rights violations when the cameras are running and also at times providing video evidence to exonerate people facing unjust criminal charges.

After months of public testimony and other advocacy, as well as recruiting attorneys to represent people with infraction citations, in 2010 the citations issued in Skid Row were finally reduced by 46 percent of their highest point and more than 2,500 citations were resolved in LA CAN’s legal clinic, avoiding high fees and other penalties for those residents.

After residents helped gather declarations and evidence, in the Spring of 2011 a federal judge ruled that the City was illegally confiscating homeless people’s property and a temporary restraining order was issued to stop those practices, protecting residents from losing their belongings.

After much testimony by residents and allies, in 2011 the Housing Authority reduced the "ban" times for those with criminal charges so now residents that have been unfairly targeted by SCI policing will not be prohibited for long periods of time from obtaining much-needed affordable housing.

 Although SCI was initially going to be a nine-month program designed to remove poor and homeless people from downtown LA, many residents have resisted and exercised their right to remain in the community - they thought folks would go without a fight, but as the protest signs still say, "We’re Still Here!"

LAFLA’s Skid Row Legal Clinic

Based on interviews with LAFLA attorneys Barbara Schultz, Phong Wong, Nicole Perez, and Angela Turner.

LAFLA holds a legal clinic every Wednesday night in the LA CAN office.  It is staffed by two LAFLA attorneys along with UCLA students and 2-3 private attorney volunteers from firms including Jones Day ,Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, and Latham & Watkins LLP.

 Nicole Perez assists a client with a government benefits problem.

The clinic was originally created to handle housing problems, but residents had so many legal needs that it had to expand its subject matters. On a typical clinic night 20-30 residents crowd into the LA CAN waiting room to get help with citations, landlord-tenant, family law, and government benefits issues, among other things.

 

Angela Turner, a Skadden Fellow, works with volunteer attorneys who are assisting Skid Row residents with legal problems.

Citations

The vast majority of tickets are for jaywalking offenses, many for being in the crosswalk when the hand stops flashing.   One elderly client, for example, who was pushing a woman in a wheel chair, got a ticket when she couldn’t make it across the street before the hand stopped flashing.   Another client who is a disabled Viet Nam veteran walks slowly because of his arthritis and got a ticket because the light turned red on him.  Others were ticketed because they started walking when the hand started flashing even though the light was still green.

In 2008, volunteer attorneys would take huge batches of cases and get them dismissed by the judges.  Then the office of the City Attorney got involved.  Now the judges are less willing to dismiss and most of the cases have to go to trial. Attorneys are literally arguing with the city attorney about whether or not the hand was flashing.  Tickets can result in fines of $400, which might as well be $4,000 to these low-income clients.  Many are sentenced to community service, which can be extremely difficult for someone who is disabled or mentally ill to carry out.

Landlord-Tenant Issues

Many cases come from residential hotels and involve flagrant disregard for the law. To illustrate, we give you a case study from the biggest offender, the Huntington Hotel:

The Huntington Hotel, built around 1910, is a 200-unit building located at Main and 8^th downtown.  Its claim to fame includes being used as a film location for Prince’s "Purple Rain" (Appolonia’s Minneapolis apartment), but for most skid row residents it’s best known as the last stop before the street.  Few tenants have sung its praises, yet it has provided a roof over the heads of hundreds of tenants.

 In 2003, it was purchased by a Landmark Equity related entity which owned more than 20 multifamily residential units within the City of Los Angeles. The management company engaged by Landmark was allegedly run by gang members. Management staff brandished weapons and one day there was a shoot out with rivals across the street.  Management allegedly turned a blind eye and a greased palm to drug dealers and prostitutes. In 2005 the building was found to have such slum conditions that it was placed in the city’s Rent Escrow Account Program. It had been previously placed in the City’s Inter-Agency Slum Housing Task Force. Although REAP permitted tenants to pay a reduced amount of rent directly to the housing department, many tenants were either unaware of the program or were intimidated into paying the owner.

In 2006 LAFLA, along with co-counsel, filed an habitability and unfair business practices suit against Landmark on behalf of fourteen tenants.

One plaintiff had lived in the Huntington over thirty years, and three plaintiffs were children. The Huntington was in dire physical condition with more than 80 outstanding violations. The rat infestation was so bad a plaintiff claimed one killed his cat. At the same time the City of Los Angeles brought suit against Landmark for a pattern and practice of engaging in unlawful business practices in relation to their ownership of residential property. The City also had a criminal suit against Landmark’s principal, Darren Stern. We settled our case for damages for our clients, believing that between REAP and the city attorney’s lawsuit the building would be repaired. Darren Stern spent some months in jail.  

In 2008, the city got a permanent injunction against Landmark and eventually settled their case for a repair schedule for the worst buildings (the Huntington among the worst), a restitution fund for tenants, and the requirement that Landmark sell their slum properties. Despite this agreement, however, somehow the Huntington, of all the Landmark properties, remained unrepaired.  In 2009 the city permitted Stern to take $87,000 out of the Huntington REAP account, money meant to ensure the building was repaired, in order to fund his restitution requirement. In other words, the extremely low-income Huntington tenants were paying for Stern’s legal obligations. LAFLA represented tenants who wanted to appeal this decision. The City refused to give the tenants an appeal hearing, and we were forced to file a Writ of Mandamus. The City relented, and permitted a hearing, but by this time Stern had been given the tenants’ rent money and he had sold the building, as required under the City’s settlement agreement. However, it turned out that the sale was possibly fraudulent, as Stern sold the Huntington to his contractor. While the City was determining what to do, the building was again sold in the fall of 2010 to the present owners.

Throughout this time period, LAFLA represented many tenants in unlawful detainer actions. All cases were won, dismissed, or settled for relocation money under the theory that the tenants owed no rent under Civil Code Section 1942.4 because of the continuing slum conditions. Despite such representations, a large number of tenants were displaced.

By the time 752 S. Main LLC purchased the property in September of 2010, they claimed there were only 60 tenants remaining. Today there are between one and four tenants.  The new owners, with plans to renovate and market to a new "clientele" immediately started construction activities in violation of the Tenant Habitability Ordinance, an ordinance meant to safeguard tenants when primary renovation occurs in units. Under the ordinance, if construction activity is to take place over 30 days and render units uninhabitable, the owner must temporarily relocate the tenant and/or offer the tenant permanent relocation assistance. In December 2010, the Huntington owners claimed their renovation would last 29 days so they would not have to pay relocation assistance. They did temporarily relocate several tenants, but they displaced far more. The construction is still ongoing, almost a year later. Despite this, the owner never offered tenants full relocation assistance as required by the law. Tenants told our community partner, Los Angeles Community Action Network (LA CAN), that they were being offered small amounts of money, usually between $500 and $5,000 to move, despite the fact that most would be entitled to over $18,000.

This spring we started hearing disturbing rumors of tenants being locked out. One very mentally disabled tenant came to our skid row clinic after having been locked out. It turns out an unlawful detainer was filed against her; however she was never served since she had temporarily relocated due to the fact that her unit had been gutted. We filed an affirmative lawsuit on her behalf, which we settled for relocation money. In the last month two other tenants came to us with the same story: unlawful detainers had been filed against them without their knowledge. They both had gotten 3 day notices telling them they had to relocate.  When one complained to the housing department both he and the owner had been told that it was an illegal notice since there was no Tenant Habitability Plan in place for those units. Despite this, the owners filed UDs and evicted the tenants with highly suspect service. LAFLA managed to get relocation monies for these tenants, only because they found their way to us.

The new owners started marketing the units in the "Huntington Apartments, a historic building" for rents "ranging from $499 to $1100," putting most of the units beyond the reach of community members. They had an open house, featuring a rock band, at the October "art walk." The problem is that the building is still in REAP, and, under the REAP statute, once it comes out of REAP the rents for the units cannot be increased from their pre-REAP amounts.  Our evidence indicates that rents were as low as $180 a month (the 30 year tenancy), and averaged between $400-$600, making the advertised rates unlawful. Prospective tenants filed complaints with the housing department. The housing department closed the complaints, saying they couldn’t respond to prospective tenants, until LAFLA intervened. Recently the housing department ordered the leasing office shut down until the correct rental amounts can be determined. However, LAFLA and LA CAN are not very confident that this process will result in the correct rental amounts, and it does nothing to address the many tenants who were displaced without relocation assistance. LAFLA is presently assessing the case for a lawsuit.

The last decade has not been kind to the Huntington. Tenants were forced to live in slum conditions and subject to unlawful management activity, while being seemingly ignored by the City even when subject to a lawsuit. Now that the building has been renovated, it is at risk of being lost to the low-income community that has supported it all these years.

Government Benefits Issues

Skid Row residents come in with problems related to their General Relief (GR) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Fake transitional housing is a growing problem.   Some of these places take the resident’s entire SSI check but don’t provide everything they are supposed to provide.  Attorney Phong Wong received a letter from a woman who said she was trapped in the home, didn’t get all of her meals, was given no money and couldn’t go anywhere.  Phong helped her file a complaint.  Attorney Nicole Perez just received a favorable decision for a client who had not gotten all the SSI benefits entitled to him.   Unfortunately, she has been unable to locate him to let him know the good news.

LA CAN and Skid Row residents demonstrate against the monthly "walk-through" of the community by the mayor and business leaders to show the progress of gentrification.

Challenges

That is not unusual.  Many of the clients are so marginalized that they must worry about where will sleep and eat, so often they don’t return or at least not right away.  Many are mentally ill and need help with the basics.  Clinic staff address one legal matter and then the client comes back with another legal matter because they aren’t stabilized.  Many of the Section 8 cases involve a communication problem.  The attorneys draft letters to ask for reasonable accommodation for disability or for more time to comply with a landlord’s request.  Many have legal issues but don’t have documentation because it was lost it or confiscated.  That means starting from scratch. Much of what the attorneys do is drafting letters and creating a written trail so that if litigation occurs in the future there is at least documentation.  

LAFLA’s Clinic for Women and Children  

 In 2009, LAFLA Skadden fellow Angela Turner was an intern in LAFLA’s Housing Unit and did some work in Skid Row.  She observed that women and children are underserved, because most of the services downtown were designed to serve single men. She crafted her fellowship to address this problem and has returned to LAFLA to run a weekly clinic out of the Downtown Women’s Center and help out with the legal clinic at LA CAN.  Each week at the Downtown Women’s Center, she helps seven or eight women with a range of legal problems, primarily housing and family law, and connects them with services in the community.  She has found that fifty-eight percent of women in the downtown community who are homeless are homeless due to domestic violence.  Forty percent have children under age eighteen.  However, fifty-three percent end up losing custody of their children once they have lost their housing.  As part of her fellowship, Angela provides representation to the women and families she works with to help them maintain housing, obtain restraining orders, and maintain custody or establish visitation with their children. She is also a member of the Downtown Women’s Action Coalition that provides service events for women living in Skid Row.

Community Economic Development and Skid Row:  Challenges and Opportunities

By Malcolm Carson, Managing Attorney, CED  & Employment Law Units

The Community Economic Development (CED) Unit has worked to improve the lives of people on LA’s Skid Row in three main ways: (1) jobs; (2) affordable housing; and (3) education.

Despite the incredible poverty and despair faced by residents of the Skid Row area, the greater downtown area is experiencing an economic renaissance, with major new developments under construction, new businesses opening up, and new, more affluent, residents moving in. This growth and development represents both challenges and opportunities for Skid Row. Challenges include the threat that gentrification poses to affordable housing, and new public desires to "clean up" Skid Row (which in practice often translates into punitive police crackdowns). The opportunities, however, derive from the existence of new economic opportunities and sources of revenue for social goals.

LAFLA has worked with community groups representing Skid Row residents such as the LA CAN to find ways to connect Skid Row residents to the opportunities created by the new growth and development downtown. We have created policies and agreements with public officials and private developers that establish "local hiring" agreements that prioritize the hiring of Skid Row residents. We currently have local hiring agreements in place on public projects such as L.A. Live and Grand Avenue, as well as with private projects such as Geoffrey Palmer’s Orthopedic Hospital luxury housing development and (in the past) even the proprietors of some of downtown’s most popular new bars. We have also been able to make sure that as new market-rate housing is developed, affordable housing is created as well, either through the construction of on-site affordable units or the creation of funding pools to construct affordable housing off-site, but nearby.

LAFLA’s CED Unit also works with dedicated volunteers and advocates throughout the Los Angeles area to create wonderful, capable organizations that can make a difference in the lives of low-income people, and Skid Row has been "Ground Zero" in that effort for a long time. We’ve helped grow and build groups like the LA CAN that speak out on policy issues and engage community residents, and we’ve helped grow and build groups like Las Familias del Pueblo that provide much-needed services to Skid Row residents. One of the more fruitful efforts over the past few years has been our assistance to Las Familias in establishing a pair of well-regarded charter schools serving children living in the Skid Row community.

LAFLA’s Skid Row Workers Rights Clinic

By Senior Employment Attorney Steve Zrucky 

Since 1986, LAFLA and Las Familias del Pueblo have partnered to help resolve important legal matters of the folks who live and work in the Skid Row/ garment district of Los Angeles.  With few exceptions, LAFLA personnel, volunteer attorneys and law students have staffed a walk-in legal clinic for workers every Wednesday evening.  Over the years, hundreds of workers have received assistance in pursuing their claims for unpaid regular and overtime wages, promised but unpaid vacation pay and meal and rest period violations.  Injured workers have received valuable guidance and information in their quest for medical care and rehabilitation. Unemployed workers, wrongfully denied their unemployment insurance benefits, have found help securing the safety net for people unemployed through no fault of their own.    Victims of employment discrimination and wrongful termination, seeking a measure of fairness and justice, arrive at our clinic each week.    The clinic also provides assistance and referrals for the residents and workers who face a myriad of other legal problems.     

 

DECLARATION OF Mr. H

I, Mr. H, declare as follows:

1.  The following information is within my personal knowledge and if called to testify as a witness regarding these facts, I could and would competently testify thereto.

2.  I am a disabled senior citizen.  I have lived in the Los Angeles area for a total of 28 years. Most of the time, I have lived at various low-income hotels.  Although there were habitability problems and the conditions were not great, these were the rents that I could afford on my meager income.  I get approximately $865 per month from Social Security Disability.  I recently applied for Veterans benefits but that is pending.

3.  I am disabled because I have acute arthritis.  I also suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of serving in the Vietnam War.  Before the Vietnam War, I led a normal life and had an optimistic future. 

4.  In high school, I was a track and field star and won the state championships in1963, 1964 and 1965 in the mile and half mile, and 2 mile relay events. I was even offered a sport scholarship to attend Michigan State University.  I declined the offer because at the time, I was part of the R&B group called Excellent and we had a recording contract with Mercury Records.

5.  This was the height of my life when everything was going well for me.  People respected me and I was able to do the things that I loved and make money from my pursuits.  I was very happy and I had a bright future ahead of me.

6.  However, before the music records were released, I was drafted into the Army.  I had no choice but to put everything on hold to go to the Army. As a result, the record company refused to back the group and release our recordings.

7.  In the Army, I was placed in the convoys and basically served as a body guard for the truck drivers. My ability to run fast was definitely an asset that helped keep me alive. But the chaos of war and the gruesome deaths that I saw in Vietnam changed me forever.  I had many close friends die in appalling circumstances.  It was difficult to think of anything but the horrible things that I saw. 

8.  My experiences made it especially difficult for me to mentally cope with civilian life after I returned.  For example when I heard sirens, I would immediately duck for cover because I imagined myself back in Vietnam.  To this day, I am always watching my back and I find it difficult to trust anyone.  For a period I recorded with a vocal group called the Young Mods, but I never experienced the same successes of my pre-Vietnam life.

9.  In 2005, arthritis became a debilitating problem for me.  My arthritis affects my neck, back and waistline.  It stiffens my body and causes my bones to ache all the time.  Arthritis prevents me from doing anything that requires physical strength. When I walk, my arthritis in my neck causes me to slouch because it is painful.  I also walk and move in a very slow manner.  It is visibly apparent that I have a physical disability.

10.  On August 26, 2010, I was walking across the northwest to the northeast corner of Los Angeles Street going north in Downtown Los Angeles.  When I was in the middle of the street, I saw that the light had turned yellow.  There was no traffic at the time.  Two police officers on bicycles stopped me in the middle of the street and cited me for jaywalking.

11.  After the officers left, I looked at the citation and noticed that I was cited for crossing the street on a red light.  This was not true.  The light turned yellow when I was in the middle.  I wish that I could run fast like I used to, or at least walk faster.  But I cannot and will never be able to because my doctor told me that my arthritis will only get worse. 

12.  I also noticed on the citation that I am being ordered to appear in court.  I do not know how to represent myself in court.  Because I am low-income, I cannot afford to hire an attorney. 

13.  Being cited for jaywalking because I am disabled and can not walk fast is very cruel. I heard that the cops are citing residents in the skid row area in an attempt to make money for the city and to clean it up.  This is very upsetting because I have been a good citizen and have risked my life to serve our country.  I am old and I just want to live a quiet life without interference. I should not be treated badly or be a target of the government because I am poor and I cannot afford to live anywhere else except in the skid row area. Fortunately, I was referred to the LA CAN Clinic to get assistance with my citation. 

14.  At the LA CAN Clinic, different volunteers helped me and an attorney that I spoke to from the law firm Kirkland & Ellis agreed to represent me at trial. I am so glad and relieved that LA CAN has this program and was able to get an attorney to represent me.

15.  I hope that my jaywalking ticket will be dismissed.  I am physically disabled and I cannot do any community service.  My income is barely enough to support me right now so I cannot afford to pay the $180 fine. 

16. It is very difficult to live on a day to day basis with my severe arthritis pain.  I also fear that if one day my disability benefits are taken away, I will have no income and will become homeless. On top of all this, the jaywalking ticket is an additional stress that I do not need at my age. 

17.  I have lived in the Los Angeles area for a long time now and I have no where else to go.  I hope the city stops ticketing people like me-senior citizens who are disabled and who have very little money.  It is not fair and it makes me upset.  I would like to continue living my life as I have been without having to worry every time I try to cross the street.   

How the Los Angeles City Attorney Directs Scarce Resources to Prosecuting Citations Leaving Domestic Violence Victims in the Lurch

By Ana Storey, Managing Director of LAFLA’s Family Law and Consumer Law Units

There was a lot of outrage around the country a few weeks ago directed at the Topeka, Kansas, City Council for removing misdemeanor domestic violence from its criminal code and towards the Shawnee County District Attorney for publicly affirming his decision to not prosecute misdemeanor offenses, including domestic violence, due to lack of resources.  While no one here in Los Angeles has declared that misdemeanor domestic violence is no longer a criminal offense, the quiet actions of our police department and city attorney have resulted in similar outcomes.  What most domestic violence prevention advocates know is that for many years now the Los Angeles Police Department has routinely failed to issue incident reports to victims of domestic violence, even when the reported incident was in violation of a valid restraining order. 

Anecdotal reports from officers point to their rationale that issuing an incident report and investigating the matter is useless when they know that the City Attorney’s office isn’t going to prosecute it.  For years, the City Attorney has justified this practice based on lack of resources.  Despite having some outstanding lawyers on their staff, including a few who are recognized throughout the state as leaders and experts in the area of domestic violence prosecution and prevention, the City Attorney has routinely failed to put the necessary resources in domestic violence prosecution.  At a meeting with the Los Angeles-area domestic violence prevention community when he first took office, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich was asked about this very issue and what his plan was to address it.  His response was to tell the advocates to instead go back to civil court and use the tool that was already available to them, the family law court’s power of civil contempt of court.  Not only was the newly elected City Attorney already abdicating his role in enforcing our laws to protect vulnerable survivors and their children, he essentially punted the issue back to the family law courts.  His statement also demonstrated a fundamental lack of understanding of the civil contempt process, the difficulty of successfully bringing these cases and the unfair burden that it puts on victims to essentially prosecute their own abusers.

 

New Healthcare Program for Low-Income People: Help Spread the Word

By Elena Ackel, Senior Attorney, Government Benefits

There is a great new program in Los Angeles County for uninsured childless adults that receive $1207 or less income per month.   The "New" Healthy Way LA (hereafter HWLA ), which will have half of its costs paid by the federal government, seeks to expand health care coverage for low-income and childless adults in Los Angeles County who are uninsured but not eligible for Medi-Cal.  Many Skid Row residents should be eligible.  The program provides a wide range of services including in-house pharmacy services, specialty services, and care and management services for chronic diseases like diabetes. The county will save money on treating existing patients in the county system who are enrolled in HWLA, but it will incur additional expenses for any new HWLA patients not previously in the county system. Given the county’s existing  budget problems, it not likely it will actively seeking new patients so social service agencies and providers will have to get  the word out about this great new program.

The new version of this program began July 1, 2011 but enrollment activities started in February of this year.  This HWLA program will cover childless adults from 19 to 64 because for the most part they do not qualify for Medi-Cal. To be eligible, the patient must be a citizen or "qualified" immigrant.  The patient’s income must be at or below 134 % of poverty or $1207 a month for an individual. About 405,000 uninsured LA county residents meet these financial qualifications. There is no retroactive eligibility. Many of those in the County’s Ability to Pay and Outpatient Reduced-Cost plans for indigent and low income adults have already been enrolled in the HWLA program. As of June 30, 2011 there were 62,052 participants enrolled.  

The county is expanding the clinic capacity at the private partner clinics to accommodate new patients and to provide the required services near the patients’ homes and in a timely manner.  With the federal money comes an adequacy and timely access standard requiring that the county network must generally provide medical services within 60 minutes or 30 miles from the patient’s home. A patient must be able to get a primary or specialty care appointment within 30 business days. The time for a primary care appointment goes down to 20 business days in a year. Urgent care appointments must be provided in 48 hours. Emergency care must be available 24/7. The patient also has due process rights if he or she is denied services, etc.

The new program does not include dental care, substance abuse treatment and provides only limited mental health benefits but services are supposed to be coordinated with the Department of Mental Health.

A potential patient can apply at any hospital or county affiliated clinic. But we have to get the word out to patients not already in the county system.