Keep the promise to residents
Gang culture and history has changed how Los Angeles residents, city officials, and officers see one another. This perception has led to assumptions that led to accusations, stereotypes, and abuse of power, which destroyed the relationship between civilians and local government officials. This led to curfews for residents of a certain age; police also enforced the breaking of potential gang injunctions no matter the area.
In 2011, Christian Rodriguez, Alberto Cazarez, Olu K. Orange, Esq., Hadsell Stormer & Renick LLP, and Public Counsel sued the City of Los Angeles for violating the rights of Angelenos through the creation and enforcement of 26 gang injunctions with unconstitutional curfew provisions. The judge ruled in favor of Rodriguez and Cazarez, which resulted in the city creating a program that would provide jobs and education programs for the nearly 6,000 Angelenos prohibited from being outside after 10 p.m.
“We were happy they put a stop to the harassment in the community because whether you’re a gang member or not, you don’t deserve to be harassed because you’re standing outside minding your business,” Alex Sanchez from Homies Unidos said as he explained the reaction to the strike down of the curfew. “There was a lot of confusion once the settlement was announced because people thought they were getting money, and once they realized it wasn’t money, they didn’t take the letters of notice seriously.”
Homies Unidos is a community-based organization that has helped reduce violence in communities impacted by gangs and policing. Since its founding in 1998, Homies Unidos has served over 10,000 youth and adults through lifestyle recovery, tattoo removal, leadership development, and services to currently and formerly incarcerated individuals and their families.
“Nobody trusted the letters, and we took it upon ourselves to become the liaison between the local government and the community so they could understand the settlement and information being passed to them,” Sanchez said. “If the local government had taken the time to reach out and work together with us, we wouldn’t have issues with the program.”
The City’s administration of the settlement program is being criticized for their long delays in providing class members services and asking them to cover costs out of pocket and wait weeks or months for reimbursement. In addition, it may have spent as much as 33% of the settlement funding on administration, although the agreement set a 10% cap. The exact spending amount has been difficult to determine due to poorly maintained and inconsistent financial records.
