Los Angeles Councilmember Nithya Raman votes against the Venice anti-camping zone

Raman votes no on Rose Avenue

Los Angeles Councilmember Nithya Raman voted against a motion on April 14, 2026, to apply Section 41.18 enforcement at 220 Rose Avenue in Venice. The City Council approved the measure 11 to 4, so her opposition did not stop it. The action allowed the city to post the area for future anti-camping enforcement under local law after required notice.

Raman represents Council District 4 and is running for mayor in the June 2, 2026, primary. Her vote placed her on the opposite side of Mayor Karen Bass and Venice Councilmember Traci Park in one of the city’s most visible homelessness disputes.

What Section 41.18 allows

That vote centered on Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 41.18, which includes citywide restrictions on obstructing parts of the public right-of-way and additional posted restrictions at designated locations.

For a site such as 220 Rose Avenue, the council must approve a location-specific designation, the city must post signs, and at least 14 days must pass before enforcement under that designation can begin. The Rose Avenue action was a site-specific use of the law rather than a blanket citywide homelessness ban.

Why Rose Avenue drew attention

That legal process moved forward because the Rose and Main area in Venice had again become a major point of conflict. By mid April 2026, television footage and neighborhood accounts showed tents, bicycles, and personal belongings spread across the area.

Nearby residents said they felt unsafe walking there and wanted the city to act. After the April 14 vote, city crews scheduled a cleanup for Friday, April 17. The Venice site had become one more example of how Los Angeles keeps returning to the same question: whether posted enforcement zones can stabilize a troubled block or only shift homelessness to nearby areas.

Park says public safety drove the motion

As that conflict grew, Councilmember Traci Park argued that the Venice site had become a serious public safety problem. FOX 11 reported that police responded to nearly 40 calls in the area during the previous year, including assaults.

Park also said outreach teams had repeatedly offered housing or shelter alternatives to people at the encampment. Her argument was direct. She said the city had already tried softer responses and that the location still remained dangerous for residents, workers, and people living around Rose Avenue.

Raman broke with the local member

Instead of backing the Venice district representative, Raman voted no and joined three other council members in opposing the motion. The measure still passed, but the split exposed a wider divide inside City Hall.

Supporters of the Rose Avenue action said each district should be able to respond when an encampment becomes dangerous. Critics said repeated enforcement does not solve homelessness and often pushes people from one block to another.

Raman’s vote, therefore, became larger than a single Venice issue. It became a public test of whether Los Angeles leaders should keep expanding block-by-block enforcement zones as the main response to visible encampments.

Raman says enforcement only moves people

Raman defended her vote by arguing that Section 41.18 duplicates laws Los Angeles already has and mainly shifts homelessness from one place to another. FOX 11 quoted her as saying the measure, at best, merely moves homelessness around a neighborhood.

That position aligns with arguments she has made for years against heavy reliance on anti-camping rules. She has warned that city policy can become a district-by-district arms race if each area tries to push encampments elsewhere.

For Raman, the stronger answer is sustained outreach and housing placement, not expanding one more posted zone that may move the same human crisis to another street.

Lesser-known fact: Rose Avenue became a shorthand for Venice’s shift from gritty to upscale. PBS SoCal called it “Revolutionary Rose Avenue” during its transformation.

Schools remain part of the debate

That broader disagreement also connects to another dispute over homeless encampments near schools. Los Angeles law separately bars sitting, lying, sleeping, or storing property within 500 feet of a school or day care center.

Critics of Raman have pointed to that rule to argue she is too skeptical of enforcement around children. Supporters answer that distance rules alone do not end homelessness and can still leave families facing the same conditions a few blocks away.

Because school safety carries strong political weight, the issue has become part of the larger mayoral argument. Rose Avenue was about Venice, but the fight clearly reached far beyond it across Los Angeles.

Bass’s office attacked the vote

Mayor Karen Bass’s office responded sharply after Raman voted against the Rose Avenue action. FOX 11 reported that Bass’s office said Raman has voted against hundreds of cleanups and also opposes the law that keeps encampments away from schools. The office called her position another step backward.

That answer turned a Venice council vote into part of the 2026 mayoral campaign. Bass and Raman are not only debating one site. They are publicly arguing over the city’s whole homelessness strategy. Bass’s side presents posted enforcement and encampment resolution as necessary tools, while Raman’s side says the city relies too much on moving people instead of housing them.

Inside Safe is at the center

That clash matters because it reaches the heart of Bass’s signature homelessness program, Inside Safe. The program aims to resolve encampments by moving people into temporary shelter, often motel or hotel rooms, while the city works toward more stable housing.

LAHSA reported in 2025 that homelessness fell for the second straight year in both Los Angeles County and the City of Los Angeles, with unsheltered homelessness in the city down 7.9%.

Bass has used those numbers to defend her overall approach. Critics, including Raman, do not deny the urgency of action. They question whether the motel-heavy model costs too much and can sustain gains over time.

Raman offers a different plan

Raman used that opening to present a different homelessness plan in early April 2026. Reporting on her platform said she wants Los Angeles to scale back the motel-centered Inside Safe model and rely more on lower-cost options such as short-term rental subsidies and shared housing.

She also called for stronger oversight, more transparent public tracking of shelter beds and placements, and structural changes involving LAHSA. Her argument is that the city should spend money in ways that reach more people and yield clearer results. That puts her in direct conflict with Bass on both tactics and accountability, not just on Rose Avenue alone.

Polls show Bass ahead for now

As that policy fight grew, polling suggested Bass still held the advantage in the mayor’s race. A UCLA poll released in early April 2026 showed Bass leading with 25% support. Spencer Pratt had 11%, Raman had 9%, and 40% of likely voters remained undecided. Those numbers showed two things at once.

Bass led the field, but a large share of voters had not yet settled on a candidate. Raman entered the race on Feb. 7, 2026, shortly before the filing deadline, in a move described as a surprise after she had endorsed Bass only weeks earlier. Homelessness quickly became the clearest dividing line.

The county is spending big too

While Bass and Raman battle over city policy, Los Angeles County is running its own major homelessness system. On Feb. 3, 2026, county officials announced approval of an $843 million spending plan for the Department of Homeless Services and Housing for the fiscal year 2026 to 2027.

County materials say the county manages 60% of Measure A homeless services revenue, and 15% of that share, about $97 million, goes directly to local jurisdictions. Those numbers show that homelessness policy in Los Angeles is not shaped solely by City Hall. County government controls a large part of the money, services, and regional system tied to outcomes on the ground.

San Diego is building apartments faster than Los Angeles as development patterns shift. Find out more about how San Diego outpaces Los Angeles in apartment construction, and how this trend is shaping the city.

A new state law adds another layer

That regional system now operates under a new California law as well. A state law that took effect on Jan. 1, 2026, says cities cannot punish outreach workers or organizations for helping people at homeless encampments.

Reporting on the law said protected assistance includes legal services, medical care, food, water, blankets, pillows, and materials that help people survive outside.

The law does not stop Los Angeles from enforcing its own encampment rules, but it does protect outreach itself. In a city where Section 41.18 actions often involve outreach before cleanup, the state law adds one more rule to an already contested system.

Several Los Angeles restaurants are tied to Marilyn Monroe through history and visits. Find out more about iconic Los Angeles restaurants linked to Marilyn Monroe, highlighting places connected to her legacy.

Should city leaders vote against anti-camping zones in places like Venice? Share your thoughts below.

This slideshow was made with AI assistance and human editing

Read More From This Brand:

• Why Pennsylvania declared martial law in Scranton for 77 days in 1877
• How an Ojibwe woman forced Michigan courts to respect tribal law in 1889
• Food in California grocery stores is set to change significantly under a new law