Los Angeles approved one of the largest tenant protection investments in the city’s history this spring. Three months later, much of the money still hasn’t reached the organizations expected to prevent evictions, provide emergency rental assistance, and enforce tenant protections.
Despite approval by the City Council and Mayor Karen Bass in March, roughly $177 million in Measure ULA-funded contracts remain unsigned as City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto and the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) continue to dispute reporting requirements, oversight provisions, and contract language. The delay has left legal aid organizations warning they may soon have to lay off attorneys, reduce services, and scale back one of Los Angeles’ primary eviction defense programs while thousands of renters continue facing eviction.
The dispute began more than a year ago, when Feldstein Soto refused to approve a new five-year sole-source contract with LAFLA to continue operating Stay Housed LA, arguing the work should instead go through a competitive bidding process. To avoid interrupting services, the City Council approved a temporary extension while directing the Los Angeles Housing Department to reopen the procurement process.
LAHD completed that competitive process earlier this year and once again recommended LAFLA to lead the city’s eviction defense program, along with Strategic Actions for a Just Economy, Liberty Hill Foundation, and the Southern California Housing Rights Center for other Measure ULA-funded homelessness prevention programs. On March 10, after hours of public testimony, the City Council approved the contracts by a 12-1 vote (Republican John Lee dissenting) despite continued objections from the City Attorney. Mayor Karen Bass signed off the following day. And yet more than three months later, the contracts remain unexecuted.
Earlier this month, Councilmember Ysabel Jurado introduced a motion directing the Housing Department and requesting the City Attorney to explain the continued delay. The motion states that all four Measure ULA contracts approved in March remain unsigned, leaving $17 million in emergency rental assistance unavailable while nonprofit providers struggle to retain staff and continue serving tenants without reimbursement.
According to the motion, Stay Housed LA providers have continued working despite the uncertainty. Between July 2025 and March 2026, they represented 2,422 tenants in court, provided limited legal assistance to 4,956 additional tenants, filed 2,548 answers that prevented default eviction judgments, helped 287 households remain housed through nearly $3.8 million in rental assistance settlements, and reached almost 65,000 tenants through outreach and education.
Feldstein Soto argues the current delay is no longer about competitive bidding. In a 237-page report released this month, her office says the contracts still cannot be approved because of unresolved issues involving reporting requirements, documentation, invoicing, audit provisions, and contract language. The report contends that LAFLA has not provided sufficient case-level documentation and financial information to verify how public funds are being spent and says negotiations remain ongoing.
LAFLA disputes those claims. According to LAist, the nonprofit says it has complied with every contractual requirement and spent months responding to audits and document requests without any finding of misconduct. LAFLA also argues that one of the central disputes concerns confidential client information that it says cannot legally be disclosed because of attorney-client privilege.
That disagreement sharpened this week after Housing Department officials publicly contradicted Feldstein Soto’s assertion that LAFLA failed to meet reporting requirements. Housing officials say the organization has complied with every request, while Feldstein Soto maintains the information remains insufficient to establish a complete audit trail and evaluate how public funds are being spent.
The latest dispute also comes amid a broader conflict over the relationship between the City Attorney’s Office and legal aid organizations that both contract with and sue the city. Before the Council approved the contracts in March, Feldstein Soto urged councilmembers to reconsider awarding such a large contract to an organization that frequently litigates against the city over homelessness and civil rights issues. More recently, her office proposed requiring ULA-funded contractors to disclose litigation against the city, a move legal aid organizations argued could discourage nonprofits from simultaneously providing public services and holding government agencies accountable.
The impasse has become a test of how City Hall functions. The Housing Department selected the contractors after a competitive procurement, the City Council approved them by a 12-1 vote, and the mayor signed off. But months later, the agreements remain unsigned while negotiations continue between the City Attorney’s Office and the nonprofit providers expected to carry out the work.
The funding at issue represents one of the largest investments supported by Measure ULA, the voter-approved tax on high-value real estate sales that funds affordable housing, homelessness prevention, and tenant protections. In recent months, Measure ULA has faced mounting pressure, from a proposed state bill that would reduce its revenue to City Hall efforts to carve out new exemptions.
The dispute is unfolding during Feldstein Soto’s final months in office. Earlier this month, she became the first incumbent Los Angeles city attorney in nearly a century to fail to advance from the primary election. The Los Angeles Times reported that no incumbent city attorney has failed to make the runoff since 1933.
The contract dispute highlights another way Measure ULA can be weakened. Voters approved the tax, the revenue has been collected, the City Council appropriated the funding, and the mayor signed off on the contracts. But if the money never reaches the organizations charged with providing eviction defense and homelessness prevention, one of ULA’s central promises remains unfulfilled regardless of how much revenue the measure generates.
For tenants facing eviction, the practical consequences are immediate. While city officials continue debating oversight requirements and contract language and run out the clock on Feldstein Soto’s tenure, the organizations expected to provide eviction defense say they are nearing a financial breaking point, raising the prospect that services approved months ago could collapse before the funding is ever released.