Mayoral hopeful Nithya Raman votes no on anti-camping crackdown in Venice chaos zone

Mayoral hopeful Nithya Raman voted no Tuesday on a Westside anti-camping crackdown, a sharp signal of how she would tackle one of Los Angeles’ worst crises.

The motion, introduced by councilmember Traci Park, sought to establish an anti-camping zone along a stretch of Venice that residents and city officials have described as persistently unstable, with recurring encampments, public safety concerns and repeated outreach efforts.

The Post recently reported on a daytime brawl at the site of the proposed no-camping zone near the iconic Rose Cafe, where at least four people were seen throwing punches and yelling.

Rather than defer to the district’s representative, a typical council norm, Raman called the item for separate consideration and voted no, joining Hugo Soto-Martínez, Eunisses Hernandez and Ysabel Jurado in opposition.

The final vote was 11–4, with the four no votes coming from the council’s left flank.

The location is not new to city intervention. It was part of an early “Inside Safe” operation led by Mayor Karen Bass, where more than 100 people were moved into interim housing over time.

City officials have acknowledged the corridor remains difficult to stabilize, with encampments returning after outreach efforts.

Park’s motion would have applied Los Angeles Municipal Code 41.18, which restricts sitting, sleeping or storing property near designated “sensitive” areas, including schools, parks and certain public spaces. The designation requires the city to document impacts on public health, safety or welfare.

City findings state that a year-long encampment at the location has repeatedly blocked a key pedestrian corridor, creating ongoing public safety risks.

“Over a 12-month period, police and fire crews responded to multiple incidents at the site, including an encampment fire, leading officials to conclude that camping within 500 feet of the intersection is unsafe and incompatible with safe passage,” Parks motion states.

Raman has consistently opposed expansions of the ordinance. She voted against key amendments in 2021 and 2022 and has argued the law shifts encampments between neighborhoods rather than resolving homelessness.

The Post reached out to to her office for comment.

In past statements, she has described enforcement-based approaches as a “district-by-district arms race,” instead advocating for a citywide strategy centered on outreach, interim housing and services.

Her office has claimed it has helped move hundreds of people indoors without relying on 41.18 enforcement. Her position has drawn scrutiny in debates over encampments near schools.

During a 2024 Sherman Oaks homeowners forum, Raman said distance requirements alone do not determine safety, stating, “I don’t think a kid’s gonna be safer if they are 10 feet or 500 feet away from a school.” The comment drew boos from the audience.

Raman later emphasized that child safety remains a priority.

“Keeping children safe is so important to me, especially as the mother of 10-year-old twins who walk to school every day,” she told The Post.

“Rather than spending resources to move encampments down the street… my focus has been on building a citywide homelessness response system that works to quickly and safely move people indoors.”

Supporters of 41.18 say it remains one of the city’s primary tools to address immediate safety and access concerns, particularly in high-traffic areas.

---

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters