The governor criticizes the city’s moratorium on shelters, while local leaders defend it as a necessary pause to address long-standing concerns.
A dispute between California Governor Gavin Newsom and the city of Norwalk escalated today, as the state imposed sanctions on the Los Angeles suburb for its decision to ban homeless shelters and other low-income housing. The city, which has a population of just over 100,000 and an estimated homeless population of 200, faces potential funding cuts and legal challenges after standing by its controversial moratorium.
The state’s Department of Housing revoked Norwalk’s approval for its state-mandated housing plan, citing the city’s failure to meet state guidelines. This could make Norwalk ineligible for housing and homelessness grants and force it to approve affordable housing projects, regardless of local zoning rules. The move is part of Newsom’s broader push to address California’s housing crisis, which has been met with both support and resistance from cities across the state.
“It’s beyond cruel that Norwalk would ban the building of shelters while people are living on the city’s streets,” Newsom said in a statement. His administration has been urging local governments to clear homeless encampments and create more housing options, arguing that cities must play a crucial role in tackling the homelessness crisis.
Norwalk Mayor Margarita Rios, however, defended the city’s actions, citing frustration with the state’s handling of previous homeless initiatives. She pointed to Project Roomkey, a state-funded temporary housing program that placed homeless individuals in local hotels during the pandemic, as a prime example of the problem. According to Rios, many participants were left without sufficient follow-up care once the program ended, returning to the streets with little support.
“They were vacating their room with no after-care, no follow-up,” Rios said. “They went back out where they started, back onto the streets of the city.”
In August, the Norwalk city council enacted a broad moratorium on emergency shelters, transitional housing, and single-room occupancy hotels, along with restrictions on certain types of businesses like liquor stores and payday lenders. City leaders argued that these types of establishments were inconsistent with Norwalk’s economic development goals. The moratorium was extended through August 2025, drawing the ire of state officials.
Critics argue that Norwalk’s ban goes beyond addressing immediate concerns and instead targets vulnerable populations. Chris Elmendorf, a law professor at UC Davis specializing in housing and land use, noted that Norwalk’s broad restrictions likely attracted state attention due to their scope. “It seems like what Norwalk did here was try to pass an ordinance that not only banned homeless shelters, which they’re not allowed to do, but tried to ban any business that provides services to poor people,” Elmendorf said.
The standoff comes as California cities grapple with new legal and political pressures to address homelessness. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling this summer gave local governments more power to regulate where people can sleep, leading some cities to take more aggressive measures. Newsom, for his part, has pushed cities to do more, but many local leaders argue that the state has not provided enough resources to address the underlying causes of homelessness.
Norwalk is not alone in resisting state mandates. Earlier this year, Elk Grove, a Sacramento suburb, settled a legal dispute with the state, agreeing to approve more affordable housing after initially opposing it. Similarly, Huntington Beach faced a court order in May to revise its housing plans, though a judge later stayed that order. State lawmakers have also strengthened the “builder’s remedy,” a provision that allows developers to bypass local zoning if cities fail to meet housing goals, making it easier for affordable housing projects to move forward despite local opposition.
Norwalk’s leaders, however, remain firm in their position. While Mayor Rios said the city council has no plans to repeal the moratorium, she expressed hope that the state would be open to dialogue. Specifically, Rios suggested the possibility of adding transitional housing at Metropolitan State Hospital, a state mental hospital located in Norwalk, which she believes could provide a more structured and secure environment for housing people in need.
Housing department officials indicated they would be willing to meet with Norwalk if the city shows a willingness to comply with state law, though they did not rule out legal action. “The state is happy to meet with Norwalk to discuss how they can comply with state law — but we will not schedule a meeting to discuss how they can best violate it,” said Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos.
Meanwhile, other cities in the region are facing similar challenges. In West Covina, Mayor Brian Calderón Tabatabai has been advocating for more homeless housing but has faced opposition from other city council members, who expressed concerns about the impact on local schools and the type of residents who would be housed in such facilities. Some council members prefer projects that focus on families or require sobriety for residents.
“I think (Newsom) needs to hold cities accountable and I’m hoping he holds West Covina accountable as well,” Tabatabai said. “There needs to be pressure. It was 115 degrees in West Covina the other day, and to think we’ve got folks out here and we could’ve had them inside.”
As the housing crisis continues to challenge cities across California, the clash between Norwalk and the state underscores the complexities of finding solutions that balance local concerns with broader state mandates. While Newsom remains determined to push cities to do more, leaders like Rios argue that local governments need more flexibility—and support—to address the unique challenges their communities face.
