This spring, an order from federal District Judge David O. Carter that Los Angeles provide shelter for all people currently encamped on skid row threw most of the city’s elected officials into a panic. Last month, they were temporarily saved from having to solve the homelessness crisis when a three-judge appeals court threw out Judge Carter’s decision.

But while city officials — and taxpayers — are momentarily off the hook, the thousands of Californians trapped on the street, in L.A. and across the state, are not.

There are roughly 63,000 homeless Angelenos, and more than 161,000 statewide, meaning California has the highest rate of homelessness in the nation. By some estimates, California has 48 percent of all unsheltered homeless Americans. Clearly, this situation cannot be allowed to continue.

This week, the Cato Institute’s Project on Poverty and Inequality in California released a report on ways to reduce poverty in the Golden State, and strategies for tackling homelessness loom large. In fact, fully one-third of the report deals with how to resolve high housing costs and the homeless crisis. And these two issues are deeply entwined.

Despite what some have claimed, California’s crisis of homelessness is driven by high housing costs. True, many people experiencing homelessness struggle with mental health or substance use challenges. But a majority of homeless Californians simply “fell to the street” because they were unable afford rent. In fact, data from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority showed that a majority of people experiencing homelessness cited economic reasons for their loss of housing.

Judge Carter’s order, however well-intentioned, would have brought a temporary respite at best because it failed to deal with the underlying problem. It would be akin to bailing out a leaky boat without plugging the holes. While the order included a provision that the city devote $1 billion to homeless services, this would have been less than 2016’sProposition HHH, which has already fallen behind on its 10,000-unit goal. And even that goal lags behind Los Angeles’ still-growing homeless population.

A pro-housing agenda addresses both the overall cost of housing and the cost-effectiveness of resources like supportive housing and shelters. Specifically, exclusionary zoning is a major factor in high housing costs. Parking requirements then add an estimated $27,000 per space for each home. Meanwhile, minimum lot sizes, set to 5,000 square feet for the most common zone in Los Angeles, mandate that homebuyers and renters buy square footage that they may not want or need.

To be sure, not everyone may want to buy or rent homes on small lots without parking, but it is individual homebuyers and renters who should make this choice instead of planning boards foisting this decision upon them. While California’s new SB 9 housing law is a step in the right direction, it leaves in place too many exclusionary requirements such as parking and lot size minimums.

Some of Los Angeles’ biggest successes have taken advantage of relaxed land-use restrictions. One project for homeless Angelenos, Bungalow Gardens in South Los Angeles, includes eight units with a subsidy of half a million dollars from Los Angeles County: less than the cost of a single Prop. HHH unit. The project, duplexes surrounding a central garden, is a design that is familiar across Southern California, but largely banned today due to density, parking, and other regulations. Los Angeles should expand these regulatory changes that have allowed for successes like Bungalow Gardens and cleared the way for more housing production.

Beyond boosting the building of new housing, California must enact a broad program of reforms to ensure that fewer of its residents are in poverty, a paycheck away from losing housing. Despite the state’s wealth, strong economic growth, and robust social safety net, California has the highest poverty rate, at over 15%, of any state using the Census Bureau’s cost-of-living adjusted measure.

While housing is central to this, and homelessness is the most visible face of poverty in California, the reforms needed to move the Golden State past its crisis of poverty extend to other areas as well. We must reform funding rules that short-change charter schools, stop overcriminalization that disproportionately affect poorer Californians, repeal professional licensing laws that lock individuals out of the economy, eliminate asset tests that punish welfare recipients for saving money, and a host of other regressive laws that put poorer Californians on an uneven playing field.

All these reforms and more must be part of California’s agenda for reducing poverty and keeping people from falling to the streets.