LA Denies Basic Services to Unhoused Residents – Planetizen

Report on Sanitation Services and Sustainable Development Goals in Los Angeles

Executive Summary

An analysis of municipal policies in Los Angeles concerning the unhoused population reveals a significant misalignment with key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The city’s current approach prioritizes punitive enforcement actions over the provision of basic sanitation and hygiene services. This strategy not only fails to address the root causes of public health issues but also actively undermines progress toward SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Analysis of Municipal Policies and SDG Alignment

• Deficiencies in Sanitation Infrastructure (SDG 6 & SDG 3)

  The city fails to provide adequate access to clean water and sanitation for its unhoused residents, a core target of SDG 6. There are only 14 permanent public restrooms available for a population of four million people. This severe lack of facilities, coupled with the termination of a program providing mobile showers and toilets, directly compromises the health and well-being of this vulnerable population, conflicting with the objectives of SDG 3.

• Inequitable Resource Allocation (SDG 10 & SDG 11)

  Municipal budget priorities demonstrate a clear inequality in resource distribution. While the ‘CARE+’ encampment sweeps program was allocated $70 million, consistent funding for essential services like trash collection and hygiene facilities is not prioritized. This policy choice exacerbates inequalities (SDG 10) and prevents the creation of an inclusive, safe, and sustainable city for all residents as mandated by SDG 11. The practice of sweeps displaces individuals, pushing them further from essential support systems and disposing of their personal property.

• Contradiction of Poverty Reduction and Institutional Justice (SDG 1 & SDG 16)

  The city’s reliance on law enforcement and punitive measures over a service-led approach works against the goals of poverty reduction (SDG 1). By ignoring requests from unhoused residents for basic services, municipal institutions are failing to be responsive and inclusive, a key tenet of SDG 16. Advocates argue that providing consistent, humane services is a more effective and just institutional response.

Recommendations for SDG-Compliant Solutions

1. Reallocate Funding to Basic Services

   Shift municipal funds from punitive enforcement programs toward the establishment and maintenance of permanent hygiene and sanitation services. This aligns budgetary priorities with SDG 10 and SDG 11 by investing in inclusive infrastructure.

2. Implement a Comprehensive Sanitation Network

   Develop and fund a permanent, city-wide network of public restrooms, showers, and regular trash collection services specifically for encampment areas. This directly addresses the targets of SDG 6 and promotes public health for the entire community, in line with SDG 3.

3. Adopt a Humane, Service-Led Strategy

   Transition from a punitive enforcement model to a service-led approach that prioritizes regular ‘spot cleanings’ and consistent access to hygiene facilities. This method offers a more humane and cost-effective solution that respects the dignity of individuals (SDG 1) and builds trust in public institutions (SDG 16).

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article directly addresses the living conditions of “unhoused residents,” which is the most extreme form of poverty. The lack of basic services exacerbates their vulnerability and poverty.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The lack of “public showers and bathrooms” and regular “trash pickups” creates unsanitary living conditions. This poses significant health risks, including the potential spread of communicable and water-borne diseases, directly impacting the well-being of the unhoused population.

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  This goal is central to the article’s main issue. The text explicitly highlights the demand from unhoused residents for “trash services or restrooms” and notes the severe shortage, with “only 14 permanent public restrooms in LA.” This points to a failure in providing adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article illustrates a stark inequality. A vulnerable group (unhoused residents) is denied basic services while being targeted with “punitive measures” like encampment sweeps. The disparity in funding, where “$70 million” is allocated for sweeps over humane services, underscores the unequal treatment and exclusion of this population.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The article discusses a critical urban management issue within Los Angeles. It focuses on the failure to provide “basic hygienic services” and manage municipal waste for all residents, which are key components of making cities inclusive, safe, and sustainable.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 1.4: Access to Basic Services

   By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services. The article’s focus on unhoused residents asking for “basic hygienic services” like trash pickup and restrooms directly relates to this target.

2. Target 6.2: Access to Sanitation and Hygiene

   By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all… paying special attention to the needs of… those in vulnerable situations. The article’s core complaint about the lack of showers, toilets, and the city ending a program that provided them, directly aligns with this target, as the unhoused are a vulnerable population.

3. Target 10.2: Promote Universal Social Inclusion

   By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… economic or other status. The city’s choice of “punitive measures” and encampment sweeps over providing services actively works against the social inclusion of unhoused people.

4. Target 11.1: Access to Adequate Housing and Basic Services

   By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services. While the article focuses more on the “basic services” aspect for those without adequate housing, the entire context of “encampments” and “unhoused residents” is rooted in this target.

5. Target 11.6: Reduce the Environmental Impact of Cities

   By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to… municipal and other waste management. The request for “trash services” and “regular trash service” for encampments is a direct call for improved municipal waste management to create a cleaner and more humane urban environment.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for Target 6.2:

  The article provides a direct quantitative indicator for the lack of sanitation facilities: “only 14 permanent public restrooms in LA for a population of 4 million people.” This ratio can be tracked to measure progress. Furthermore, the termination of the program that “provided showers and toilets at encampment sites” is a negative progress indicator.

• Indicator for Target 11.6:

  The lack of “ongoing funding to trash services for encampments” is an implied indicator. Progress could be measured by the allocation of budget funds and the establishment of regular, funded trash pickup services for these areas, as advocated for by residents.

• Indicator for Target 10.2:

  The city’s budget allocation serves as a clear indicator of its priorities and policies regarding inclusion. The article contrasts the lack of funding for services with the “$70 million” allocated to the ‘CARE+’ sweeps program. A shift in this funding allocation from punitive to supportive measures would indicate progress toward inclusion.

• Indicator for Targets 1.4 and 11.1:

  The proportion of the unhoused population with access to basic services (sanitation and waste management) is a key implied indicator. The article suggests this is currently very low and has recently decreased, providing a baseline against which future improvements can be measured.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: planetizen.com