Shelter and the Storm: the Local Politics of Homelessness in Urban California

Homelessness is the most glaring manifestation of American inequality today. Amidst frenzied debate over causes and appropriate responses, what gets lost is that homelessness is fundamentally a political problem. Despite comparable pressures, local governmental responses to homelessness vary widely. What are the political dynamics shaping local governance of homelessness and the particular policies adopted to address it?This dissertation begins answering this question by identifying the central political problem stymying effective solutions: political fragmentation. Decisions over how to address homelessness are divided across district-based representatives, bureaucratic agencies, and levels of government, each operating under distinct priorities, pressures, and mandates. Effective solutions require local governments to overcome fragmentation and pursue coordinated, collaborative strategies.To assess the political dynamics promoting collaborative coordination, I conduct a mixed-methods comparative analysis of homeless policymaking in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Adopting an ethnographic approach to archival analysis, I virtually attend all homeless-related policy meetings of the cities’ local legislatures between 2008 and 2020, analyzing thousands of hours of public policymaking, 768 distinct policy actions and nearly 3,000 public comments. I also use GIS and statistical tools to conduct precinct-level analysis of five homeless-related ballot initiatives.Over the course of four case-study comparisons, I argue that differences in two key explanatory variables – policy authority and political culture – best explain contrasting success surmounting the forces of fragmentation. The considerable authority vested to L.A. City Councilmembers, and the culture of consensus in which they govern, yields tangible policy consequences including commitments to geographic equity and comprehensive, collaborative implementation of citywide policy, even in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. In San Francisco, factional and inter-institutional conflict and contention over policy authority perpetuate a segregated landscape of homelessness and stymie proposals to use the pandemic as a catalyst for expanding homeless solutions.Though cities in California won’t be able to solve homelessness on their own, local governments will be intimately involved in any policy response to the problem. The lessons from L.A. and San Francisco in this pivotal political moment reveal dynamics that can help foster the collaborative, coordinated governance required of any effective, lasting solution