Nithya Raman votes towards Venice anti-camping zone close to Rose Cafe

Mayoral hopeful Nithya Raman voted no Tuesday on a Westside anti-camping crackdown, a pointy sign of how she would sort out one in every of Los Angeles’ worst crises.

The movement, launched by councilmember Traci Park, sought to determine an anti-camping zone alongside a stretch of Venice that residents and metropolis officers have described as persistently unstable, with recurring encampments, public security considerations and repeated outreach efforts.

The Submit lately reported on a daytime brawl on the website of the proposed no-camping zone close to the long-lasting Rose Cafe, the place at the least 4 individuals had been seen throwing punches and yelling.

Relatively than defer to the district’s consultant, a typical council norm, Raman known as the merchandise for separate consideration and voted no, becoming a member of Hugo Soto-Martínez, Eunisses Hernandez and Ysabel Jurado in opposition.

The ultimate vote was 11–4, with the 4 no votes coming from the council’s left flank.

The placement isn’t new to metropolis intervention. It was a part of an early “Inside Protected” operation led by Mayor Karen Bass, the place greater than 100 individuals had been moved into interim housing over time.

Metropolis officers have acknowledged the hall stays troublesome to stabilize, with encampments returning after outreach efforts.

Park’s movement would have utilized Los Angeles Municipal Code 41.18, which restricts sitting, sleeping or storing property close to designated “delicate” areas, together with colleges, parks and sure public areas. The designation requires the town to doc impacts on public well being, security or welfare.

Metropolis findings state {that a} year-long encampment on the location has repeatedly blocked a key pedestrian hall, creating ongoing public security dangers.

“Over a 12-month interval, police and hearth crews responded to a number of incidents on the website, together with an encampment hearth, main officers to conclude that tenting inside 500 ft of the intersection is unsafe and incompatible with secure passage,” Parks movement states.

Raman has persistently opposed expansions of the ordinance. She voted towards key amendments in 2021 and 2022 and has argued the legislation shifts encampments between neighborhoods reasonably than resolving homelessness.

The Submit reached out to to her workplace for remark.

In previous statements, she has described enforcement-based approaches as a “district-by-district arms race,” as a substitute advocating for a citywide technique centered on outreach, interim housing and companies.

Her workplace has claimed it has helped transfer tons of of individuals indoors with out counting on 41.18 enforcement. Her place has drawn scrutiny in debates over encampments close to colleges.

Throughout a 2024 Sherman Oaks owners discussion board, Raman mentioned distance necessities alone don’t decide security, stating, “I don’t suppose a child’s gonna be safer if they’re 10 ft or 500 ft away from a faculty.” The remark drew boos from the viewers.

Raman later emphasised that baby security stays a precedence.

“Maintaining kids secure is so vital to me, particularly because the mom of 10-year-old twins who stroll to high school each day,” she advised The Submit.

“Relatively than spending assets to maneuver encampments down the road… my focus has been on constructing a citywide homelessness response system that works to rapidly and safely transfer individuals indoors.”

Supporters of 41.18 say it stays one of many metropolis’s major instruments to handle fast security and entry considerations, notably in high-traffic areas.

---

Obtain The California Submit App, observe us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters