As Los Angeles City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo defended the city’s commitment to easing the homeless crisis during a second day of intense questioning, a federal judge had not yet ruled on whether to compel Mayor Karen Bass and two Los Angeles Councilmembers to testify in a contentious court hearing over the city’s response to homelessness.

The hearing, which ended late Friday afternoon, is scheduled to resume Monday.

The hearing is a part of a 2020 lawsuit filed by the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a coalition of business owners and residents that accuses the city and county of failing to adequately address the homelessness crisis.

At the center of the case is a 2022 settlement, in which the city pledged to create 12,915 new shelter beds over five years and provide housing for at least 60% of unhoused people in each of the city’s 15 council districts.

The LA Alliance contends the city has failed to meet its obligations under that agreement and is seeking the testimony of Bass and Councilmembers Traci Park and Monica Rodriguez—all of whom were subpoenaed but have not yet appeared in court.

Testimony resumed Friday with Szabo back on the stand, where he faced extended cross-examination from both sides. Szabo defended the city’s approach, arguing that the agreement provides broad flexibility in how it meets its housing obligations.

“I believe that is evident throughout the document,” he said.

Szabo also said the city is committed to fulfilling the agreement, despite “severe financial headwinds.”

“There’s a complete commitment by the leadership, and every member of the City Council to meet our obligations under this settlement agreement,” he said.

Attorneys for the Alliance challenged that interpretation, arguing that the city is downplaying its responsibilities under the agreement.

“We have yet to hear anything that suggests that the city has not violated the agreement,” said Matthew Umhofer, an attorney for The Alliance. “What we’re hearing from the city right now, especially from Mr. Szabo, is that the agreement doesn’t really commit the city to much of anything. And that’s not consistent with the language of the agreement, and it’s frankly, not consistent with anybody’s reasonable interpretation of the agreement.”

The proceeding grew tense at times, with the city’s attorneys frequently objecting to the plaintiff’s line of questioning – citing lack of foundation, vagueness or irrelevance. The plaintiffs’ attorneys, in turn, occasionally pushed back with objections of their own, accusing the city’s legal team of coaching witnesses during cross examination.

Judge David Carter gave no indication of when he might issue a decision on whether Bass, Park and Rodriguez will be required to testify.

City attorneys have asked the court to quash the subpoenas, arguing that the elected officials are “apex witnesses”—high-ranking government officials who should not be compelled to testify without compelling justification.

In legal filings, they argue the subpoenas impose an “undue burden” on the officials, risk revealing information that is legally protected from disclosure and fail to provide adequate time to comply.

Outside the courtroom, a couple of formerly unhoused residents of Skid Row who attended the hearing said they were frustrated by the city’s response and wanted more transparency from officials.

Don Garza, a Skid Row resident and veteran who testified earlier this week in the case, said he came because he was concerned that key information about Mayor Bass’ Inside Safe Initiative was being withheld from the public. He also described worsening conditions in Skid Row.

“It used to be like you hear about or see people die, like maybe once every two weeks or once a month or whatever,” he said. “It’s every day now.”

He added that some unhoused residents avoid moving into low income housing units because of poor living conditions.

“They don’t want to move in that housing because it’s substandard housing, and they’re like, ‘no I’d rather stay in the street, and so they wind up dying on the street.”