The video asks why the homeless, "... can do this in Venice but not in Santa Monica?"
The answer is law enforcement. Santa Monica was first to allow homeless vagrants free reign (~1990's). As a result, the vagrants all went there, knowing there was no enforcement. Property values dropped. Crime rates skyrocketed. It got really, really bad.
It got so bad, they stepped up enforcement. They had to. The property owners demanded it. City Council members were elected on an enforcement platform. It got better, a little bit better, but not much.
Venice was NEVER nice, never safe. It always had a dark side to it - gangs, drugs, vagrants. Now, it is worse, and not just at the beach.
Personally, I would not live in Venice. BTW, it was, literally, a choice I made. I made that choice back when things were a lot better in Venice than today.
I don't know what to recommend to the OP.
I recommend against Santa Monica and Venice - a hard NO!. That would include West LA, too.
Brentwood and Pacific Palisades are hard to recommend because of the prices for a young person starting out.
Farther south, Marina del Rey, Playa del Rey, Westchester may be a bit better - lower costs, less crime but longer commutes and higher commuting costs.
The South Bay beach communities - a little more reasonable cost but much longer commutes (~1 hour each way in rush hour traffic) and higher commuting cost. Definitely safer, by far.
Basically, this situation makes it difficult for employers to hire and retain qualified people. Yes, it's THAT bad.