Los Angeles spent more than $62 million on a program to house 2,000 homeless people — and filled three apartments.
Story Snapshot
- The Time Limited Subsidy Program launched in September 2025 with a goal of leasing 2,000 apartments for homeless residents.
- A July 1, 2026 presentation to the city’s housing committee showed only three units were occupied after $62.6 million was spent.
- Councilmember Nithya Raman chairs the committee that oversees the program and is now running for Los Angeles mayor.
- A separate city report found more than 1,100 taxpayer-funded homeless housing units sitting empty under Raman’s oversight.
A $62 Million Program That Filled Three Apartments
The Time Limited Subsidy Program was supposed to be the smarter, cheaper answer to Los Angeles homelessness. Councilmember Nithya Raman championed it as a proven model. The city launched it in September 2025 with a clear target: secure 2,000 apartments for homeless residents. By late June 2026, a presentation to Raman’s own housing committee showed just three units occupied. Taxpayers had already sent $62.6 million out the door.
Raman’s office did not deny the numbers. Her team called the data an “early snapshot of the redesigned program,” suggesting the rollout was still in progress. That framing might carry more weight if the program were a few weeks old. It launched nine months before that committee presentation. Calling three units out of 2,000 an “early snapshot” asks a lot of the public’s patience — and their wallet.
Raman Built Her Mayor Campaign on Attacking This Exact Problem
The painful irony here is hard to miss. Raman built her 2026 mayoral campaign by attacking Mayor Karen Bass’s Inside Safe program. She argued that motel rooms under Inside Safe cost roughly $85,000 per person per year. She said the Time Limited Subsidy approach would cost closer to $24,000 annually per household. Those numbers may be accurate in theory. In practice, her program spent tens of millions and moved three people off the street.
Raman also pointed to city data showing that 67% of people who received time-limited subsidies since July 2024 exited into permanent housing. That sounds strong. But it describes a prior version of the program, not the redesigned rollout she launched in September 2025. Critics are right to ask why a “proven model” produced such a stark result in its newest form.
The Empty Units Problem Goes Well Beyond This One Program
The Time Limited Subsidy failure does not stand alone. A separate city report found more than 1,100 taxpayer-funded housing units for homeless people sitting empty while Los Angeles spent $911 million acquiring properties through the Homekey program. The Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), the city’s lead homeless agency, was suspended by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development after a federal inspector general opened a fraud investigation. A prior court case revealed the city claimed credit for paying 2,293 time-limited subsidy beds when financial records showed it actually paid for only 673 of them — about 30%.
LA Mayoral candidate and Councilmember Nithya Raman, the chair of the Los Angeles City Council’s Housing and Homelessness Committee, spearheaded a $63 million project promising to get people off the streets by delivering 2,000 apartments.
Wanna know how many she delivered?
👉… pic.twitter.com/jb4tZeIUVs— AwakenedOutlaw⚒️ (@AwakenedOutlaw) July 17, 2026
This is a pattern, not a one-time stumble. Los Angeles has spent billions on homelessness over the past decade. The street population has not meaningfully shrunk. The city also paid nearly $40 million to settle federal claims that it misused housing grants by building units inaccessible to people with disabilities. At some point, “early snapshot” stops being an explanation and starts being an excuse.
What the Data Actually Tells Voters Before the Mayor’s Race
Raman is asking Los Angeles voters to make her mayor based largely on her homelessness expertise. She chairs the City Council committee that oversees these programs. The Time Limited Subsidy Program is her signature initiative. Voters deserve a straight answer on why $62.6 million produced three occupied apartments in nine months — not a reframe, not a redesign announcement, not a promise of a future accountability dashboard.
The underlying July 1 committee presentation has not been released publicly. No city audit of the program’s spending breakdown has been published. Without those documents, the public cannot see exactly where the money went or why leases were not signed. That silence is itself a data point. Good stewardship of public money does not require a subpoena to verify. Los Angeles voters have been told for years that the next program will be the one that works. Three apartments in nine months at $62 million is not a rough start. It is a result.
Sources:
thegatewaypundit.com, abc7.com, nypost.com, knock-la.com, cityclerk.lacity.org, citywatchla.com, hud.gov