Governor Gavin Newsom’s push to outlaw homeless encampments is reverberating throughout the state but Santa Monica has a longstanding anti-camping ordinance that goes above and beyond the new state model in almost every way.
Santa Monica's current anti-camping ordinance imposes significantly stricter regulations on homeless encampments than Governor Gavin Newsom's recently proposed statewide model ordinance, according to an SMDP comparison.
The local camping rules are in the spotlight again this week after Newsom released a draft ordinance on Monday calling it a model for municipalities to follow as they attempt to remove homeless camps from public spaces. He said cities can use his draft ordinance wholesale or use it as a model for new restrictions but Santa Monica appears to have little need for the state’s suggestions.
Santa Monica's municipal code broadly prohibits camping in virtually all public spaces within the city limits at any time. The local law defines "camp" as erecting, maintaining or occupying a camp facility for living accommodations, with "camp facility" encompassing structures and other items used to make a living space in the public domain.
"Prohibited public places" under Santa Monica's ordinance cover comprehensive territory, including parks, beaches, the Santa Monica Pier, public streets, sidewalks, alleys, parking lots, passageways, rights-of-way, landscaped areas, greenbelts, public schools and college property.
The ordinance classifies violations as criminal misdemeanors punishable by fines up to $500 per violation. Enforcement is handled by Santa Monica Police, who typically issue citations that are then referred to the City Attorney's Office for possible prosecution.
City officials emphasize that enforcement follows a "lead-with-compassion" philosophy. The City Attorney often routes individuals to diversion programs addressing underlying issues like mental health or substance abuse rather than pursuing jail time or convictions in every case.
The laws differentiate between individuals who are just taking a nap or temporarily using public space and individuals who are using the public space as “living accommodation.” For example, someone sleeping off one too many on a park bench or the beach would not constitute “camping” but someone who intended to use the same bench or beach as their place of residence would.
Santa Monica also enforces related ordinances designed to prevent encampments, including prohibitions on sitting or lying in certain doorways at night, bans on leaving personal property on sidewalks, and night closures of public parks. Police officers and the specialized Homeless Liaison Program team typically give warnings and offer services before issuing citations.
The city credits this "services-forward approach" with preventing large-scale encampments seen in neighboring communities and the city’s approach has withstood legal challenges.
In contrast, Newsom's May 2025 model encampment ordinance, titled "Addressing Encampments with Urgency and Dignity," focuses on preventing permanent or hazardous encampments rather than banning all outdoor sleeping. The proposal urges California cities to adopt uniform procedures when clearing homeless camps.
Newsom's approach is backed by $3.3 billion in state funding from Proposition 1 to help provide shelter and services as enforcement increases. The model ordinance emphasizes three core principles: not criminalizing homelessness without alternatives, prioritizing shelter and dignity, and maintaining public health and safety.
"No person should face criminal punishment for sleeping outside when they have nowhere else to go," states the governor's proposal, which discourages blanket citywide camping bans unless adequate shelter options are available.
The state's model prohibits specific behaviors including constructing semi-permanent structures on public property, camping in one location for more than three consecutive days, camping within 200 feet of posted notices, and blocking sidewalks or public paths.
Rather than outright banning temporary sleeping arrangements, the state ordinance targets behaviors that create persistent encampments or public hazards. It defines the "same location" as within 200 feet of the original spot, preventing people from evading rules by moving only a short distance.
Notably, the state proposal mandates 48-hour written notice before clearing encampments except in emergencies. The notices must include the date and time of planned enforcement, details on available services and shelter, and explanations of how unattended belongings will be handled.
The model ordinance also requires officials to make "every reasonable effort" to identify and offer shelter and supportive services before taking enforcement action. Personal belongings removed during cleanups must be collected, tagged and stored for at least 60 days, with exceptions for hazardous items like weapons, toxic materials or bio-contaminated items.
"Even when urgency forces immediate action, there is a follow-up requirement to inform individuals how to get their belongings back," the state proposal stipulates.
Santa Monica's ordinance is more restrictive in several key areas. It forbids even a single night of camping on public property, whereas the state model implicitly allows temporary camping for up to three days. This zero-tolerance approach means that under Santa Monica's code, a person sleeping in a public space for just one night could be cited immediately.
Santa Monica's ordinance explicitly covers educational facilities, including Santa Monica College and School District properties, reflecting a focus on keeping encampments away from schools. While the state model allows jurisdictions to prohibit camping near schools at all times, Santa Monica has already implemented this restriction.
The local ordinance also explicitly makes violations misdemeanors, while the state proposal does not specify penalties, instead emphasizing connecting people with housing over punishment.
However, the state's model does impose stricter procedural requirements in several areas. Unlike Santa Monica's code, which contains no formal notification requirements, the state ordinance mandates 48-hour written notice before clearance operations. While Santa Monica often provides verbal warnings or short notices as a courtesy, these are not legal requirements in the ordinance.
The state model also legally requires cities to offer shelter and supportive services before enforcement, whereas Santa Monica's approach is guided by policy rather than explicit legal text. Though Santa Monica has historically offered services first, the state ordinance would standardize this as an enforceable requirement.
Regarding personal property, the state proposal provides more detailed protections, requiring 60-day storage periods and clear instructions for retrieval. Santa Monica follows similar protocols due to constitutional requirements, but the duration and specific procedures are not explicitly codified in local law.
In both cases, the rules target overnight camping, not the act of homelessness. Homeless individuals, and their property, could still occupy public space provided that occupancy did not cross into whatever definition of “camping” applied to that location.
City staff said the local combination of ordinances allows officials to be flexible when appropriate but also provides enough enforcement to handle problems as they arise. Newsom’s declaration does not mandate municipalities adopt his proposal and while there are no immediate plans to revise Santa Monica’s rules local officials said they are currently studying the State’s approach.