The Los Angeles City Council on Wednesday delayed action on City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto’s request for an additional $5 million to pay Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, the same right-wing law firm that billed nearly $1.8 million for just 13 days of work in the city’s homelessness legal battle this past May. The request now goes to the Budget and Finance Committee amid growing concern about runaway legal costs draining funds from critical homelessness services during a deepening budget crisis.

The original $900,000 spending cap approved by the Council in May was quickly shattered as Gibson Dunn racked up more than $3.2 million in legal bills within three months—snowballing without timely disclosure to Councilmembers. Billing at $1,295 an hour, the firm’s 15 attorneys have aggressively defended the city’s approach, which a federal judge ruled was out of compliance with a 2022 settlement requiring nearly 13,000 new shelter beds by 2027.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez expressed outrage, saying she was “enraged” by the spending on a settlement reached years ago. “The city should be more focused on becoming compliant and housing individuals,” Rodriguez told LAist. “There are people in L.A. who know how to stretch $1,300 for longer than an hour.”

Councilmember Bob Blumenfield characterized referring the request to committee as sending a message. “My hope is that the City Attorney and reasonable folks at Gibson will sit down and figure out an alternative bill,” he said in a statement. “We must pursue appropriate cost review based on the fact that this is the public’s money, that every dime spent on lawyers is one less dime spent on homeless interventions, as well as the fact that they exceeded the limits without authorization.”

This continued legal spending spree comes amid a nearly $1 billion city budget deficit and cuts to some homeless services. The City Attorney’s office has defended Gibson Dunn’s work as “exceeded our expectations and delivered exceptional results,” according to spokesperson Ivor Pine. Yet it declined to release additional invoices or timely alert Councilmembers when the contract’s spending limits were far exceeded.

The firm’s controversial track record, including cases that have expanded cities’ rights to criminalize homelessness and shaped national politics, raises ethical and political questions about the city’s choice of counsel. As the LA Alliance for Human Rights and a federal judge impose mounting pressure, the stakes remain high.