Skip to main content

Counting the homeless on a hill of mansions

My night as a survey volunteer in the wealthy Los Angeles neighborhood of Bel Air

Counting the homeless on a hill of mansions

An entrance to the upscale Bel Air area of Los Angeles. (Reed Saxon/AP)

Last week I experienced something that, based on my eight years of living in Los Angeles, is really quite extraordinary: Try as I might, I couldn’t spot a single homeless individual within 6 square miles.

Every year, Los Angeles County conducts a homeless count in all the neighborhoods within its purview. LA has to do this count if it wants to get federal money from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and though the methodology is flawed (it leaves out a huge population of invisible homeless who live in motels or crash on friends’ couches), the count still plays an important role in helping policymakers register the magnitude of the homelessness situation. Last year’s count revealed a 23 percent spike in LA County’s homeless population, to nearly 58,000, a number LA officials called “staggering” and “scary.”

This year, about 8,000 volunteers roamed the streets on foot or cars with their flashlights and tally sheets to count the homeless for three nights, and I was one of them. I sat in the back seat of a Chevrolet Volt with a clipboard, peering out the open window for any potential evidence of homelessness—whether individuals with obviously bad hygiene and weathered skin, couples in tents, families in vehicles with parking tickets and lights on, or makeshift shelters of tarps and carts. I was in a team with two other volunteers. One, an official with the LA Housing & Community Investment Department, manned the wheel. The other, a digital advertiser, navigated. I was the designated counter, which meant I marked lines on my tally sheet whenever I saw a homeless person.

Each team was assigned a census tract, and my team had to cover most of Bel Air, a hillside residential neighborhood with some of the wealthiest residents in the country. For more than two hours, we drove around the borders of our census tract, weaving through narrow, steep streets that abruptly halted in front of bolted gates and private driveways and, in one case, a humongous white bull statue. We meandered so many of these hidden alleyways that I could feel the half-digested cookies in my stomach sliding up my throat, but I forced my eyes open to look for any individuals who looked like they didn’t belong. We saw Tolkienesque castles with majestic front gates that seemed like they belonged behind a moat. We saw grand, swooping villas, glimmering cars, and swanky, futuristic structures with transparent glass walls and infinity pools. What we did not see was a single sign of homelessness.

None of us was surprised. When you’re living in a home worth $6 million to $250 million in an enclosed, highly guarded area, you’re probably also resourceful enough to make your neighborhood very unfriendly to the homeless. Here, hired security guards chase out strangers, while gated communities ward off trespassers. The closest service provider or public restroom is miles away, and the roads have no sidewalks for the homeless to set up camp. Meanwhile, statistics show that the homeless population is growing, while the amount of affordable housing is shrinking—so we knew that the lack of homelessness we saw in Bel Air was not indicative of the real situation in Los Angeles.

“This is a good thing, isn’t it? Should we be disappointed that we didn’t see a single homeless person tonight?”

Although we didn’t see any homeless people, we knew they were around: December’s Skirball fire, which destroyed six homes and damaged 12 more in Bel Air, was apparently ignited by an illegal cooking fire at a homeless encampment in a nearby ravine. Those campers are now gone: The only things officials found at the abandoned homeless site were a scorched portable stove, a pot, a cheese grater, several fuel canisters, a ruined boombox, and burned pages from a children’s encyclopedia. The incident sparked debate within the Bel Air community. Some residents said they sympathized with the homeless, but others said they fear another fire outbreak and want the authorities to crack down on encampments.

By the time we returned to our deployment site at Bel Air Church, it was almost 11 p.m. Some of the youngest volunteers greeted us by the door with hopeful smiles. “Any luck?” a dark-haired boy asked.

I shrugged. “Zero,” I said, returning a tally sheet with no lines, just ovals.

“Oh, really? Zero?” said the boy, looking a little crestfallen. He and his young buddies packed us bundles of leftover cake and brownies in case we got hungry on our drive back home. They also handed out little cloth knapsacks stuffed with hygiene products in case we ran into any homeless persons on our way.

As my teammates and I left the church, we wondered, “This is a good thing, isn’t it? Should we be disappointed that we didn’t see a single homeless person tonight?”

I thought about the New York Times journalist I met that night during the homeless count orientation and guessed that if anyone was most disappointed, it would have been him. He had shown up with a reporter’s notebook and a photographer, hoping to string together some narrative for a future story on LA. He said he had chosen the Bel Air site because he had read about the Skirball fire and had hoped to catch a visible juxtaposition between the rich and the poor. I doubt the photographer got much out of his trip except for some pretty snaps of pretty homes with pretty views.

By the time I reached home, it was almost midnight. My low-income neighborhood is so dense that it’s usually impossible to find parking that late at night, so as usual, I parked at an illegal spot with the plan to move it early in the morning before the parking enforcement officer zipped in. The moment I stepped out of the car, I spotted a homeless man snoring on top of some cardboard on the sidewalk next to a city-run nursing home. As I walked to my apartment, I passed another homeless man who has been living in my neighborhood for as long as I have. He was curled up next to a dollar store with a plastic bundle for a pillow. Nope, it’s not hard to spot homelessness in my neck of the woods.

That New York Times reporter wanted a dramatic scene of the stinking rich and the stinking poor living side-by-side to highlight inequality and injustice in the city. But here in LA, people divide themselves physically by class and, to some degree, by race—and maybe that’s the problem. If you have to rummage through bushes and climb down ravines to find a homeless person, then it’s too easy to forget they even exist.


You must be a WORLD Member and be logged in to the website to comment.
  •  notalemming's picture
    Posted: Wed, 02/14/2018 09:49 pm

    I'm a bit confused about this article.  What is the purpose of it?  Is it to demonstrate that wealthier neighborhoods have less of the homeless living around them because they are unwilling to accommodate the homeless?  Or is it to demonstrate the very expectation the reporter hoped to exploit, the juxtaposition of the poor to the wealthy?  Do we have homelessness because folks are unwilling to care for the indigent, or because the homeless are unwilling to care for themselves?  And why is it that upscale neighborhoods have less, if any, homeless among them?  Hmmm.  

    As this world continues down the spiral of immorality and total equality (regardless of one's willingness to participate in one's own wellbeing), we can expect that the homeless population will certainly increase.  Any why not?  Every one has times of discomfort or calamity, but for the career homeless person, these discomforts are part of the life they chose to embrace.  Understand this is not about being heartless.  We support organizations that specifically work with the homeless to help them gain their lives back, for those who want to have a life of freedom and inclusion.  But what about those people who refuse to work their way out of homelessness?  Are we as a society responsible for those who refuse to be responsible?  Well according to our Liberal friends, yes.  But how many of those Liberal folks actually give of themselves both in effort and monies?  Or is it easier to use other people's money and time to "correct" the "injustices" of our society?  It's a rhetorical question, but based on what my emanates from the mouths of liberals, perhaps an appropriate question. 

    I believe that we approach both our homeless issues and our crime issues with a lack of Biblical resolve.  We will always have the poor among us, but does the Word command us to enable the unwilling?  Or are we to require the unwilling to work in order to eat?  Are the communities that have a greater population of homeless in them experiencing higher crime rates?  Is this ok?  Should we insist the homeless have equal access to all neighborhoods regardless of the level of wealth in a neighborhood?  Sort of spread out the problem?  

    Homelessness is surely an unfortunate situation.  There are folks who have truly hit hard times, folks who work hard and struggle to meet their bills, who want nothing more than to be an asset to society, not a burden.  For these folks I would willingly give a hand to.  But, for those who have decided to make it a career, a lifestyle, a way out from responsibility.........not in my neighborhood, not in my town, not in my state.  California will welcome them...with my and your tax monies.