A Skid Row Cop's Opinion - 6
July 12, 2025
To Feed or Not to Feed, An Important Question.
Hello again. I am Senior Lead Officer Deon Joseph. I am the Lead Officer of Skid Row. My duties do not just include crime prevention, but the quality of life issues that affect the homeless community. Many people outside of the skid row realm tend to look at this area as a quasi community. The thing they fail to realize is that there are good law-abiding people here whether they are street dwellers or residents of low income housing who see skid row as a true community in every sense of the word. Like any community, they desire litter free streets, and responsible behavior from those who live, work, or visit this area.
Community members voice their concerns to me on a daily basis. One of their major concerns is the feeding of the homeless by outside groups. Their hearts are in the right place, but the results of their activities contribute to the poor quality of life for the skid row community.
Throughout the week, and particularly on the weekends, large groups of caring individuals come from all over the county to drop off food and bags of clothing on Skid Row to those they perceive to be in need of such items. These individuals come from all faiths and walks of life to do their good work.
But they never hang around long enough to see the aftermath of their activity. They are oblivious to the realities of the skid row area. My goal in writing this as in all of my writing is to educate people, not embarrass them or ridicule their good intentions (unless I discover their intentions are not good at all). It is being done to show them how they can be of better service to this community in a more responsible and orderly fashion.
One of the myths surrounding the skid row area is that the homeless here are starving. I am sure you have heard public service announcements on radio stations and television depicting the people here as being malnourished and without clothes.
The truth is that no one goes hungry on skid row. Within my area there are several missions that serve food three times a day to the poor and homeless members of our community. The average person on skid row can eat up to four times a day. Within these shelters, anyone who desires to drop off clothing to the homeless can do so. Since I have worked in skid row, I have never observed anyone die of starvation or go without clothing unless they did so of their own free will, or as a result of mental illness or drug addiction.
Though these truths exist, homeless feeders still come down to skid row by the dozens and give out paper bags full of food, and throw plastic bags full of clothing onto the sidewalks. They do not recognize that one of the driving forces keeping many of the homeless on skid row is the flourishing narcotics trade. When they are finished doing their good work, the homeless individuals in question remove their halos and begin bartering their food items and clothing for narcotics. Since most of them have already eaten, most of the containers and food provided to them end up on the sidewalk and street, where rats, and other vermin feed throughout the night. The clothing ends up spread throughout the corridors of my designated area, causing skid row to look like the city dump. When these streets look like a dump, people are more inclined to dump other items such as sanitary napkins and human waste on the sidewalk, creating one of the unhealthiest environments in the City of Los Angeles. Sometimes glass items are given to the homeless in the form of soda or other refreshments. These items are later used as weapons that cause injuries to other homeless individuals. Fights often break out over these items as they are being distributed, not because they are desperate for food or clothing, but because they trying to find the best item to sell for money in order to buy crack cocaine, heroin, or marijuana.
There are also environmental issues to be considered, such as biodegradable and non-biodegradable items ending up in storm drains throughout the area and hurting our environment.
These are just some of the ugly images that community members, service providers, and officers are faced with long after the feedings are done. Central Police Officers in partnership with community members have tried to express these concerns to numerous groups that engage in this activity. All efforts have fallen on deaf ears, primarily due to the perception that law enforcement is somehow against helping the homeless, and desire to 'criminalize' anyone trying to do something that in their mind is positive for a marginalized social class. This is far from the truth. Some cities across the nation are creating ordinances, and laws that would prohibit homeless feeding. We believe that these laws are extreme, insensitive, and send a message that those helping the needy deserve punishment. Yet, when our words of truth continue to fall on deaf ears, the end result becomes enforcement because we cannot allow this activity to continue and cause the decay of the skid row area.
Enforcement is not the direction we seek to take on these issues. We are seeking voluntary cooperation with these groups. We desire for feeding groups to come to the table with us and discuss this important issue. If you do not believe the things I say because of my uniform (which I proudly wear none the less), we will have community members, and service providers who help the homeless on a 24 hours basis at our meeting, who will tell you how this activity hurts their community.
Service providers have offered to open their doors to allow groups to work out of their facility and volunteer their services to help the homeless. In doing so, two things would occur: First, more homeless individuals would go to the missions for the services they need. Secondly, food items and clothing would be distributed in a more orderly fashion, which would minimize fights, and improve the quality of life on the streets of skid row.
If you do not desire to work with the missions, I would ask that you be more responsible for your actions by sticking around and cleaning up after every feeding. Pick up the clothing left on the street after the homeless have had their pick. Community members have been placing trashcans on street corners throughout the skid row area to assist you with that.
In closing, it has been the goal of the Safer Cities Initiative to better the lives of the skid row community through enforcement, enhancement, and outreach. Your LAPD Central Officers are one small part of the solution to end homelessness by releasing the grip of crime in the area that keeps many homeless people on an endless downward spiral. We welcome the open hearts and minds of anyone with the desire to assist us in this effort in a humane and sensible way that does not hurt the lives or quality of life for the homeless community.
As always, I offer challenges to those who may not agree with me to come and see for themselves the things that I speak of. I am particularly asking those that engage in homeless feedings to please contact me at 213-793–0740 or E-mail me at 32511@lapd.lacity.org. I along with the City Attorney and Skid Row residents would like to meet and dialogue with you in the near future. Please understand that we are not against you. We want to help you do your good work here.
Sincerely,
Senior Lead Officer Deon Joseph
LAPD Central Division
Dear Officer Joseph, I would like to clear up one little thing. People who give directly do so because when they give to an agency, much of what they give is wasted in "administrative costs" - in some charities nearly 50% of every dollar goes to line the pockets of the "agency". I will share your post with my godsister's small church in South Central. She lovingly sets out to feed the poor every weekend. She is a selfless woman of little means who is grateful to
G-d and wants to share what she has with less fortunate people, not with impersonal nonprofit agencies whose CEOs go home to gated communities. I'm not saying the people you are working with are like that, but you might want to post their financial info. I share some of your frustration as part of the community further down the street. When I see that crack head asking for money by the freeway I want to hold up my sign, "hit a monkey, get a cookie." But then, G-d is not finished with me yet.
Posted by: your sister/friend | July 12, 2025 at 03:39 PM
What a crazy world we live in, when someone tries to do some good by feeding and clothing the homeless and the police want to make this a crime.
I remember last year I took bags of clothes to hand out on skid row, I'm glad I was not arrested. (lol). Should I have asked are you going to wear those pants or sell them for crack?
Posted by: Los Angeles Resident | July 13, 2025 at 05:08 AM
Deon,
I commend you, you are one hard working individual. You work in a city where the monkeys are in charge, yet you spend all that time typing all that info. The bottom line is the more yuppies that move down there, the more pressure will be applied to Bratton, the more he will bend to political pressure the more B.S. policies he will enact and the more homeless people will get messed with. See I summed it up real good, and it only took me 3 minutes to write.
Posted by: Big Chad | July 13, 2025 at 05:29 AM
Officer Joseph, thanks for your thoughtful post. I am wondering if you considered converting your information into a flyer that you could have at the ready and pass out to these folks when they come down and feed the homeless. And then maybe suggest that if they want to help they can donate to the missions.
Your story reminded me of stuff that happens to me every day here in Chicago. We have homeless in the downtown area, but not nearly as many as you have in your beat. They pick key areas of ingress and egress, like bridge crossings, and they ask for money. I never give them money because I don't want my money to be used to buy drugs or alcohol. Some time ago I decided to soften my position a little. Therefore, occasionally, if it's convenient for me, and if the question is posed in terms of how they want money for something to eat, I will pick up a little something at the Starbucks (my usual destination), such as a sandwich or a cup of grapes or whatever. Then on my way back to work I'll encounter the person, and I'll say, "here, you were hungry so I bought this for you." I'll usually say it's from Ellie Keyes (Colorado murder victim; family asked that we think of her when we give to others).
My new policy has led to a variety of experiences. Very rarely, I get a thank you. Most of the time, I get a request for money instead. On one occasion, this homeless guy came into the hot dog stand and panhandled, and I bought him a hot dog. I used the last dollar I had in my pocket to do that. He then asked me why I hadn't bought him a coke and fries! Also I ordered it plain, because Lord knows what might agree with his stomach. He was unhappy that it didn't have the right stuff on it. At the same hot dog stand last week, I saw someone else get approached and hand a different homeless guy his fries instead of giving money. The guy took the fries, walked about 10 feet down the sidewalk, and then hurled them skyward into a bunch of hungry pigeons.
The one positive experience that sticks out in my mind is a guy in a security guard outfit who was actually thankful. He hit me up with a story about how he needed bus fare because he had lost his keys or left them at his security guard job or whatever. I laughed because I had seen him before. He had told me the same story a few months earlier in another part of downtown. This is theft by deception, and it's illegal in Illinois. On that day, I had pointed him out to a passing patrol unit. They FI'd him, I think, nothing more. So I ran into him outside the Starbucks, and I laughed, and I said, "hey, I know your gig, but at least you're persistent." I asked him if he was hungry and he nodded, and he looked at me when he did, and I knew he was telling the truth. So that sandwich didn't get tossed to the birds. I think it was the best meal he had that day, maybe that whole week. I guess I fed him and then left him to commit more larceny against people. I guess maybe I'm not such a great person. I don't know.
Officer, I don't know why I keep doing this. I have a soft spot for hungry people, I guess. The reality is that they are mentally ill or drug-addled, and most of us do-gooders just don't grasp that. I sure do agree that dumping food and clothes on these folks without any thought to the consequences is dumb. I try to be more discriminating, but maybe I am just as dumb. I think my experiences have by and large demonstrated that most of these folk don't want your food. They want your money, but they'll take food or clothing if they can barter it. Sadly, our actual experiences with homeless people, and I mean experiences that go beyond bringing the car to a stop and tossing a bag onto the sidewalk, can be quite dismaying.
In any case, I am the kind of person who probably makes your job harder. Maybe this comment will help you understand us and deal with us in some way that is better for everybody. Good luck to you.
Posted by: Gabe | July 13, 2025 at 10:50 AM
*in a sarcastic tone* There are ever so many violent committed by marijuana fiends who need to get their fix. I can't believe an officer, a senior officer at that, compared marijuana to crack and heroin. Seriously, when will the decriminalization end?
Posted by: mike | July 13, 2025 at 04:39 PM
A great article in the Daily News!
What if activists were wrong about LAPD?
By Robert C. J. Parry
Article Last Updated: 07/14/2007 06:38:08 PM PDT
Last week on Santa Monica Boulevard in Hollywood, two LAPD officers chased a theft suspect before tackling and wrestling him to the ground. When dust settled, crime-scene tape cordoned the area as detectives scoured for evidence.
Their investigation was unrelated to the theft. The alleged thief wasn't even the suspect. Rather, their focus was Officer Ivana Gallegos, who, for all intents and purposes, is the suspect in an assault. The possible crime: During the struggle, Gallegos' radio struck the suspect's head. Accidentally.
Why did this innocuous incident require such fanfare? Why was this cop treated like a criminal?
Short answer: The federal consent decree.
In the late 1990s, rogue Rampart Division CRASH officers provided the Los Angeles Police Department's legion of critics with ammunition to get the Clinton administration Justice Department to place their vaunted enemy under the oversight of a federal court.
In certain circles, it is gospel truth that the LAPD is racist, brutal and corrupt. The consent decree was their panacea for the "The Gang in Blue," as the American Civil Liberties Union once labeled the department in full-page ads. News reports of the day show that many predictions were made about the decree's benefits, but few were quantifiable. The only concrete promise was that the decree would provide definitive proof of LAPD racial profiling.
The message in the undercurrent was unmistakable: Things will change — fewer shootings and uses of force. Fewer public complaints, more complaints sustained, and none swept under the rug. More officers prosecuted for "bad" shootings like that of Margaret Mitchell (a mentally ill transient shot to death in 1999 after brandishing a screwdriver).
So federal Judge Gary Feess decreed — at the city's acquiescence — that L.A.'s Finest must fill out reams of paperwork. Feess incorporated the anti-cop activists' recommendations in dictating policies that bring every action by every cop under a bureaucratic microscope.
However, when viewed in the context of statistics, this remarkable scrutiny seems to reveal something the activists never expected.
All complaints against officers are now thoroughly investigated and subject to triple audits — by the LAPD Audit Bureau, the inspector general and the consent decree monitor. The complaint's plausibility is disregarded. Just ask the cop who was investigated for stealing a woman's ovaries.
Serious uses of force are double-investigated — one administrative investigation and one criminal one, functionally making an officer a suspect in an assault — just like Officer Gallegos. And each of those investigations gets the same triple audit, thus producing eight potential reviews per incident.
In short, after six years, if the LAPD was at all brutal and corrupt, shootings should be down, use of force down, complaints down, sustained complaints up and more officers prosecuted.
But the numbers show something quite different.
In the three years before the consent decree — when the LAPD was allegedly at its worst — the department averaged 40.6 shootings (excluding accidents and animals) per year. Under the decree, that average has risen to 46.8 — an increase of 15 percent. That figure hit 56 — twice.
Remarkably, only once has the single-year OIS total been lower than the highest of the pre-decree period. In terms of shootings per thousand arrests, the comparison is magnified, reaching 70 percent higher than the pre-decree average.
Even with the police's leading critic, John Mack, in the catbird's seat — the presidency of the Board of Police Commissioners — the BOPC has ruled just four shootings out-of-policy in two years, all involving officers in stressful situations. In two cases, no one was hit, and in one — the Devon Brown case (a 13-year-old joyriding suspect shot to death by an officer in February 2005) — Mack made his conclusions known before even joining the commission.
If the LAPD's top critic finds only a handful of this increasing number of shootings to be factually improper, exactly how bad was the situation?
The activists can't complain that these incidents are poorly investigated — their hand-picked second-guessers scrutinize investigations they set up. Yet no officer has been prosecuted for an on-duty shooting since Rampart. By contrast, two officers were prosecuted for shootings between 1993 and 2001, both with the old system, and Rampart corruption leaders Nino Durden and Rafael Perez were also convicted based on LAPD investigations.
As for racial profiling, the statistics are foggy — to the activists, anyway. The numbers show people of certain races are stopped more often in certain neighborhoods. But they revealed no evidence of illegal or unethical conduct.
So, the BOPC demanded another survey. When that report proved nothing, it launched a third inquiry. While the commission is clearly determined to prove its preconceived conclusion, the fact remains that the lone detailed promise of the consent decree remains unfulfilled.
The statistics for complaints against officers are equally at odds with the activists' premise. While complaints have increased 25 percent, the rate at which officers are found guilty has dropped to 50 percent of the pre-decree level. Keep in mind, complaints now receive far more investigation and scrutiny than in prior years. The bulk of sustained complaints are generated by the LAPD itself for things like preventable traffic collisions. For citizen complaints, the triple-audited investigations sustain less than seven of every 100 allegations. Before the decree, more than 15 percent were found true.
So much for a department that couldn't investigate itself.
About the only statistic that appears to have tracked as the activists indicated is use of force. On a per-100-arrests basis, serious use of force is down about 20 percent. However, serious use of force ("categorical use of force," in LAPD parlance) has remained consistently between 80 and 100 incidents per year. This year, there have already been more than 70 CUOF incidents. Notably, the LAPD couldn't provide pre-decree figures for comparison.
Ironically, one cause of these trends may be the consent decree itself. Cops are fleeing in record numbers.
At the LAPD's last Medal of Valor ceremony, nearly a quarter of the recipients wore uniforms of their new departments. Fully 60 percent of LAPD officers now have less than five years on the force. Notably, officers who leave the LAPD before five years must refund their academy costs, so 60 percent of officers are financially handcuffed to the department. As a result, inexperienced cops with unseasoned supervision are using more deadly force and getting more complaints, but the force is deemed acceptable and the complaints are increasingly bogus.
So much for promises.
However the numbers play out, this evidence of activist puffery should be of little surprise when compared to the statistics of the Rampart scandal itself. Though 86 Rampart-related officers were sent through the LAPD disciplinary system, two-thirds were deemed innocent of all charges. Just seven were fired. Of the nine cops criminally prosecuted, only five were found guilty.
Perhaps most telling, while the city paid $70 million to people who were wrongly prosecuted, according to Rafael Perez, it also lost a $15 million jury verdict to four of the accused Rampart cops who sued because they felt persecuted
To the activists, these facts are, quite literally, footnotes in the story — that's where activist attorney Connie Rice buried the $15 million payout in her most recent report, "Rampart Reconsidered," a seminal tome for the anti-cop crowd.
And perhaps reconsideration is exactly what's needed.
While Ivana Gallegos reconsiders her decision to tussle with a theft suspect, perhaps fair-minded Angelenos should reconsider the Rampart scandal.
Here's a question to start: What if everything the activists said was a lie?
---
Robert C. J. Parry is an independent observer of politics and media in Los Angeles. Write to him at rcjparry@gmail.com.
Posted by: Ed O'Shea | July 15, 2025 at 10:49 AM
Hello Sister Friend. Thanks for you comment.
In response to clothing being wasted by the Missions, in the same token food being dropped off by "drive by feeders" are also wasted in the streets and gutters. When bags of clothing are thrown into the street to the homeless, most of the undersired clothing ends up spread all over the sidewalks and streets and left there.
Personally I get upset when people throw bags of clothing into the strreet and drive of as if the homeless people here are nothing more than a pack of stray animals.
I don't see the homeless people in my area in such a light. I see them as human beings who need direction to the services they need, where they can get what they need in a humane and orderly fashion via the missions.
As for your friend who donates her time and love to feed the homless. I am reminded of another person who cared for homeless individuals and children with as much if not more passion than anyone I knew until her recent passing.
That person was my mother. What separated her from other people in my mind is that she conducted her activities with a sense of responsibility.
Every week and many many times during the week, she and members of her feeding crew would feed the homless in the local parks.
When she was finished with the feedings, she and her fellow feeders would clean up after people they fed so they were not a burdon to the community they operated in.
So in closing, in no way shape or form would I ever tell you or your friend to stop lending a hand to those less fortunate.
That would make me a hypocrite based on my upbringing.
What I am asking is that people find a more responsible way, i.e. working within the missions, or if not, sticking around and clean up after yourselves so that you will cease to be a contributing factor to the poor quality of life in the area.
Take care of yourself.
Posted by: Senior Officer Joseph | July 16, 2025 at 12:23 AM
Mr Parry, hit the nail on the head. Great article, I believe Rampart is much ado about nothing. There's no outcry about these people. Most of them were guilty, Perez had to have made some good arrest.
Regarding Officer Joseph's dilemma, It's a sad state of affairs when we see homeless people sell food that was given to them out of the public's generosity. Officers' in Central Area walk a tough beat, filled with HIV, AIDS, Tuberculosis, Hepatis A, Scabies and you name it, these people have it. These officers are attempting to do the impossible and the ACLU does a disservice by tying our hands.
Well, I have an idea. Since the ACLU says it is not against the law to live on the sidewalk. We should bus the homeless to Ramona Ripston's house and she can cook and take care of these people. Also, lets make the sidewalks around ACLU HQ a camping zone without the porter potties provided by the taxpayers that are often use for illegal activities. Then maybe, just maybe things will change here in the City of the Angels.
Posted by: Jose Ortiz | July 16, 2025 at 01:07 PM
I love when Officer Joseph gets an opportunity to post his thoughts here. Always a good read, good insight, and to me pretty much right on the money. He calls it as he sees it. I do believe that some readers have misunderstood what he wrote or read into it what they wanted. I do not think that Officer Joseph said or was insinuating that the kind people who feed the homeless are criminals or doing something bad. I think he made it clear that he understands that the intentions are good but that sometimes good intentions don’t lead to the most positive of results. These good Samaritans are the angels of our society. It is nice to know that they still exist and feeding and clothing a stranger is one of the most basic kindest things you can do for another person. At issue here though is that sometimes a good deed is not received in the manner that was intended which leads to the problems Officer Joseph mentioned. Sometimes our best intentions make us enablers that allow people who need assistance to instead continue down the sad path they are on. I do understand kind hearted people not wanting to donate to organizations or to volunteer with organizations they don’t believe in but there are many organizations and by doing some research, there is likely a way to find a good mission that manages their funds well and that allows the volunteers to be very involved in the distribution of food and clothing. Nonprofits are not perfect, I do agree many mismanage money but there are good ones that not only serve the basic needs but that also help these homeless individuals get back on their feet with proper social services.
I also don’t think that his only concern is cleaning up the area for the rich. Gentrification occurs in many major cities. It is nothing new. Every place in which it occurs leads to the streets being cleaned up for the new residents. Quite frankly if the LAPD did nothing at all the clean up Skid Row it would still happen. Money talks, the investors would still find a way to privately clean it up. I don’t personally believe that all the good that has been done lately by the LAPD in Skid Row has been to just clean it up for the rich. I see it as the officers working there have finally been given the go ahead and resources to do the same work they have always wanted to do. Please, really does anyone think that officers join the LAPD just to please the rich people? No, they do it to protect and to serve everybody. I would guess that the officers that work this area care more about the homeless than the activists and critics. If they didn’t care, they would work some other division.
Really all of this is a never ending debate. People will always see things differently. I for one though do believe that Officer Joseph is speaking from his heart and wants only the best for all the citizens he serves. He often puts himself out here to express his opinion and every time gets some form of criticism but I do believe that many of us, myself included appreciate his efforts and those of his fellow officers. Keep up the good work and keep the posts coming Officer Joseph. Your posts are very insightful.
Posted by: Jennie | July 16, 2025 at 10:28 PM
I like the idea of what ACLU claims to be trying to do. But most of the results they try to or actually produce are normally the furthest thing from anything I would like. This is an unbelievably serious problem but because of the scourge of political correctness, actual answers are not likely to ever be heard, or implemented.
Posted by: Dairenn Lombard | July 17, 2025 at 07:53 PM
Officer Joseph,
I want to thank you for this article. I have felt a strong need to give back and try to make a difference in the lives of those less fortunate....even if it is just ONE person. I was planning on getting some of my friends, family and our children together and go down to skid row with blankets, clothes and sports equipment (for the kids).
I am the first to acknowledge that my perception of what life on the streets is like is limited to televison documentaries and newspaper articles. I decided to research and make sure that I am giving in a responsible manner. The reality (based upon your article) is far beyond what I had perceived to be "helping". I now want to make sure that when we give it will make a difference and not contribute to the problem. I, like so many other "naive" people, just feel a calling to help. The question now would be, "How do I give responsibly? What are the most effective missions to contribute to? What does this broken community need from a person like me? Where do we even began to help?"
You are obviously a reliable and active part of this community. Having your input would be ideal for "outsiders". I think you need to put together some flyers, newspaper articles and/or public service announcements that will reach beyond the "inner circles" of Skid Row. I was fortunate to stumble upon your article....wouldn't it be more helpful to take a more pro active approach to getting the word out. There is obviously SO MANY people trying to help, that knowledge and guidance would be the most effective form of "Making A Difference".
Please consider my request to take this article one step further and try to get the word out before others with a giving heart continue to make the same mistakes.
I would welcome any further advice or suggestions from you before we make our trip down there! I want to be a caring, responsible, and loving person who can try to make a difference....one person at a time!
Posted by: Lisa Petrarca | February 22, 2025 at 05:43 PM