Lindsey P. Horvath, Supervisor for Los Angeles County, has directed the termination of two proposed interim housing projects on Ocean Avenue in the City of Santa Monica, calling on the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health (DMH), St. Joseph Center and the city to identify alternative locations. The projects had become the focal point of intense neighborhood backlash even as all sides admitted that the type of supportive housing that would have been offered is desperately needed.
The two facilities, originally slated for conversion of former senior-living buildings on the 400- and 800-blocks of Ocean Avenue into a combined 49 units of supportive housing for individuals with serious mental health needs, were announced in early October. According to St. Joseph Center and county officials, the model included 24-hour staffing, professional security and screening of residents who could live semi-independently, with at least 15 beds reserved for Santa Monica residents.
But the announcement caught city leaders by surprise. The city government and local residents say they were not informed in advance, and that public outreach and engagement were minimal, however outside of providing political heat to county officials, there was little they could do. However, that pressure seems to have been enough.
Supervisor Horvath released a formal statement condemning the county’s process with her announcement that the project will not be moving forward:
“When a project moves forward without community awareness, it erodes trust. In this case, that trust has been broken, and the community is right to be frustrated. That’s why I have directed the termination of the Ocean Avenue projects and directed DMH to work with St. Joseph Center and the City of Santa Monica to identify alternative sites that meet community needs.
The lack of transparency and coordination in this process is unacceptable. It’s exactly why I directed the County to unify all homelessness and behavioral health housing programs under one coordinated department — to ensure clear leadership, consistent communication, and accountability as we address our homelessness crisis.”
The need for mental health and housing resources remains urgent. We must all work together to deliver the solutions we need.”
The termination call comes after the earlier “pause” announced on October 14, in which Horvath acknowledged that “there has been inexcusably little engagement around this proposal.” Following the pause, county officials promised tours of the buildings, town-hall meetings, and an extended funding timeline for the state’s Behavior Health Bridge Housing (BHBH) program.
Mayor Lana Negrete of Santa Monica has welcomed the termination directive while underscoring that the city remains committed to supporting additional behavioral-health housing — so long as the process includes meaningful municipal partnership and community input. She told the Daily Press when the “pause” was announced that “we must continue building real accountability, transparency, and community engagement into every step of these processes.”
Supporters of the housing model argue that West Los Angeles (Service Planning Area 5) is badly undersupplied with behavioral-health beds, and the bridge-housing model offers an important intervention for individuals cycling through homelessness, hospitalizations and emergency services.
With the termination directive in place, the county, city, and St. Joseph Center will now embark on locating alternative sites for the same number of units or more. The question now shifts to where, and how, the process will engage neighborhoods, local stakeholders and municipalities from the outset. Supervisor Horvath’s statement emphasizes that “clear leadership, consistent communication, and accountability” must accompany any future project.
For the time being, the two vacant buildings on Ocean Avenue remain unused for this purpose. The county says grant funding for the BHBH program has been extended to accommodate schedule shifts.
The episode around the Ocean Avenue sites underscores ongoing tensions in Southern California’s housing-and-homelessness strategy: the urgent need to deploy supportive housing for vulnerable populations collides with local concerns about process, siting, and community voice. As the county and city step back to reconsider the approach, the broader challenge remains: how to balance speed, compassion and local consensus in addressing homelessness, mental illness and housing in one of the region’s most prized communities.
Author
About The Author
