Nitya Raman Opposes Anti-Encampment Measures in LA
On Tuesday, mayoral candidate Nitya Raman cast her vote against an anti-encampment initiative for the West Side, signaling her approach to a significant crisis in Los Angeles.
The motion, proposed by City Council member Tracy Park, aimed to create a no-camping zone in Venice, an area that residents and officials have deemed unstable due to ongoing encampments, safety concerns, and repeated efforts to provide aid.
Recently, there was a report of a brawl involving at least four individuals near the proposed no-camping zone close to the well-known Rose Cafe.
Raman was joined by Hugo Sotomartínez, Unis Hernández, and Isabel Jurado in voting against this motion, urging that it be reviewed on its own rather than through the typical district representation process.
The final vote resulted in 11 in favor and 4 against, with opposition coming from the more progressive members of the council.
This area has previously seen city intervention as part of Mayor Karen Bass’ Operation Inside Safe, which successfully relocated over 100 individuals into transitional housing over a period of time.
City officials acknowledged the challenge in stabilizing the area, as encampments often reemerge after relief efforts.
Park’s motion, if approved, would have invoked Los Angeles City Code 41.18, which limits activities such as sitting, sleeping, or storing belongings in designated “sensitive” areas like parks and schools. The city would also need to evaluate its effects on public health and safety.
The findings from an ongoing encampment at the site indicated that it had become a barrier to pedestrian access and posed a safety threat.
According to Park’s motion, police and fire departments had responded to numerous incidents at the site, including fires, suggesting that encampments near intersections are unsafe.
Raman has been a consistent opponent of expanding the ordinance, having previously voted against similar amendments, arguing that such legislation merely shifts encampments from one neighborhood to another without addressing the root causes of homelessness.
Her office was reached for comments, but no response was available at the time.
In the past, she has characterized an enforcement-based approach as a “district-by-district arms race,” advocating instead for a broader citywide strategy focused on outreach, transitional housing, and comprehensive services.
Supporters of the 41.18 measure argue that it is an essential tool for mitigating safety concerns in high-traffic areas, especially near schools.
At a recent forum, Raman expressed skepticism about whether simply increasing distance requirements from schools ensures safety. This statement received backlash from the audience.
Despite this, she later reaffirmed her commitment to child safety, emphasizing the importance of protecting her own children, who are of school age.
“It’s crucial for me as a mother that my kids are safe while walking to school,” she mentioned. “Instead of just addressing encampments, I’m dedicated to developing a citywide response system that ensures people are quickly and safely housed.”
The debate continues, with varying opinions on how best to tackle the issues of homelessness and public safety in Los Angeles.
