N.C. Coalition to End Homelessness attacks bill banning camping on public property
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience. Generate Key Takeaways
People experiencing homelessness was forced to move from this encampment in Wake County. (Photo
The N.C. Coalition to End Homelessness (NCCEH) on Monday stepped up its opposition to a House bill that would make it unlawful for local governments to allow or authorize camping or sleeping on public property.
A day before the bill was scheduled to be taken up by the House, the coalition issued a statement condemning the bill and tech-industry capitalist Joe Lonsdale who it contends is behind controversial House Bill 781 and similar bills across the country. The House is scheduled to take up the bill Tuesday at 2 p.m.
HB 781 would allow local governments by 'majority vote' to designate local government-owned property located within its jurisdiction to be used for a 'continuous period of up to one year for public camping or sleeping purposes.' Local governments can renew the one-year period.
Lonsdale founded the Cicero Institute, a conservative think tank, that has led efforts to pass similar legislation in Arizona, Missouri, Tennessee, Iowa, Georgia, Florida, Wisconsin and Kentucky.
'While Cicero describes itself as a think tank, its policies promote industries that potentially profit from criminalizing poverty,' said Dr. Latonya Agard, executive director of NCCEH. 'States that adopted Cicero laws find they are funneling more public money into incarceration, so while these bills could lead to the financial enrichment of out-of-state investors of privatized jails and prisons and monitoring technologies, they will worsen conditions for North Carolinians without housing.'
Cicero has been a staunch opponent of the Housing First approach to addressing homelessness. The model prioritizes providing individuals and families with permanent, affordable housing as the first step in ending their homelessness.
'With no proof-of-concept for sanctioned encampments or apparent awareness of North Carolina's diminishing supply of affordable housing and subsequent increases in first-time homelessness, Lonsdale blames Housing First,' NCCEH said in its news release.
Rep. Brian Biggs (R-Randolph) said last week that he sponsored the bill after leaders of local municipalities came to him looking for guidance in handling homelessness. Biggs insisted the bill doesn't criminalize homelessness as some critics contend.
'It addresses the use of public property for camping and sleeping without prohibiting homelessness,' Biggs said. 'It does create clear guidance. We need guidance.'
NCCEH noted that Iowa and Arizona lawmakers rejected similar bills this year. It describes such legislation as 'unfunded mandates' that increases liability for local governments.
'Absent state fiscal support, the NC bill diminishes local autonomy while making cities and counties both fiscally responsible and legally liable for the implementation of state-sanctioned encampment policies,' NCCEH said.
Local governments across the state are reviewing the proposed legislation to determine their liability if it becomes law, NCCEH said.
'Just a month after the Florida law went into effect, the first lawsuit was filed — resulting in a hasty sweep of an encampment without a plan for where people would go,' the group said.
NCCEH is referring to a homeless camp in Marathon, Florida that was cleared by the Monroe County Sheriff's Office in February after a group of local residents and business owners sued the city claiming it was in violation of new state law regulating such encampments, WLRN Public Media reported.
The lawsuit cited Florida law passed last year that bans public sleeping and camping. The law went into effect last October. Similar to the one proposed for North Carolina, the Florida law allows public sleeping and camping only after a municipal government officially designates an area for that purpose and provides restrooms, running water, security and access to mental health and drug rehab services. The law also allows residents to sue their municipalities for non-compliance, WLRN reported.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Clean energy tax cuts in reconciliation budget would stall renewable energy projects in Iowa
Wind turbines along west-bound Interstate 80 on March 29, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Clean energy advocates said Iowa stands to lose jobs, manufacturing facilities, renewable energy project expansions and face more expensive utility bills if Congress passes the budget reconciliation bill as is. Many of these credits were extended via the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which put them under attack from Republican lawmakers opposed to the green policies. Renewable energy advocates say continued investment into wind, solar and other clean energy sources, regardless of environmental impact, is vital to meeting growing energy demands. Nearly three-fifths of Iowa's total electricity generation comes from renewable sources, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which also reports Iowa is one of the top states for solar and wind energy generation. Since 2019, Iowa has generated more electricity via wind than from coal and continues to grow its solar production. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Kristina Costa, who formerly worked at the White House implementing the Inflation Reduction Act's energy and climate policies, said the IRA established at least 10 years of tax credits to support clean energy industries, which launched new projects and expanded the industry. 'The House bill that the Republicans passed explodes that entire paradigm,' Costa said. 'It functions as a full repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act.' Costa, during a Thursday press conference with Climate Power, said the bill 'really radically' changes how clean electricity developers can plan and develop their projects, by eliminating the ability to 'lock in' a tax treatment at the start of construction. 'This is going to create a lot of uncertainty for project developers,' Costa said. 'It's going to raise financing costs for project developers pretty considerably … but it also just means that fewer projects will end up qualifying for the credits.' Clean energy tax credits impact transportation, power generation, industry and construction and create incentives for projects like renewable vehicle fuels, solar, wind, nuclear power generation and more. Per the reconciliation bill text as it passed the House May 22, the bill would terminate clean vehicle credits, residential energy efficiency credits, hydrogen fuel credits and place restrictions on credits for clean electricity production, zero-emission nuclear energy production and other sectors. Some of the restrictions include strict construction timeline requirements, like beginning construction within 60 days of enactment, and bringing the projects online by 2028. Costa said these timelines create an 'incredibly sharp cliff' for developers to work within for projects that often take years and can face lengthy setbacks from supply chain disruptions. The budget bill also has extensive language pertaining to and restricting projects that have any ties to foreign entities. Costa said these restrictions are 'very complicated, unworkable, Byzantine requirements' that impose 'a lot of red tape' for developers and would have the 'immediate effect of freezing the market.' She said it would require companies to understand where 'literally every nut, bolt, screw and wire in a project they are building comes from' and certify that it does not have any ties to China or to Russia. Costa said gutting these policies will lead to increased energy costs for American customers. A study from Clean Energy Buyers Association analyzed the impact of removing just two clean energy tax credit programs, and found it would cause an average increase of 7% for residential electricity costs. Part of the problem is an anticipated 2% energy demand increase nationwide, in 2025 and again in 2026, according to the EIA. Much of that energy demand is a result of battery manufacturing and data centers. Iowa alone has roughly 100 data centers, which is one of the largest concentrations in the midwest. 'The near term additions to the grid are going to come from renewables, or they're supposed to come from renewables under the current tax regime,' Costa said. 'That is why you would see these consumer electricity price increases.' A spokesperson for Alliant Energy, one of Iowa's utility companies with significant investments in solar and wind energy, said the company is monitoring the bill. A spokesperson for MidAmerican Energy declined to comment on the pending legislation. Earlier this year, NextEra Energy proposed restarting its Duane Arnold Energy Center, a nuclear plant near Palo. A representative from the company did not answer questions about the impact the Republican-sponsored bill would have on the Iowa project. A study from The Nature Conservancy found that clean energy tax credits in Iowa alone would add more than $238 million in annual economic value to Iowa, if left intact through 2032. Repeal of the credits would also affect associated manufacturing companies, like those that make solar panel parts, or wind turbine blades. Analysis from Climate Power found 400,000 jobs nationwide would be in jeopardy without the tax credits supporting the expanding industry. Joe Zimsen, an Iowa resident with 10 years of construction experience in the wind industry, said the IRA created a 'tremendous amount of hope' among his colleagues in the industry that has now 'disintegrated' because of budget bill. Zimsen formerly worked on wind projects near Grinnell, but now works for Renew Energy as a construction manager for off-shore wind projects. He and his family still live in Iowa, and he urged Iowa senators to oppose the bill as it is currently written. 'This policy of killing offshore and onshore wind and solar energy is going to have tremendous detrimental effects and set us back another 10 to 15 years behind our competitors, like China and Europe,' Zimsen said. 'We can't afford to do that.' U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said Tuesday that wind energy incentives have been at risk since 2015 when he worked to extend them, and he said he senators would try to find a 'compromise' on them again, Radio Iowa reported. But, the so-called, 'big beautiful bill' comprises much more than just clean energy concerns, which Grassley said means one issue can't 'stand in the way' of the rest of the bill. U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst's office did not respond to requests for comment. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
USA Today
27 minutes ago
- USA Today
The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier
The post-fight fallout from Trump-Musk battle could get even uglier Show Caption Hide Caption Six takeaways from the President Donald Trump, Elon Musk feud From disappointment to threats, here are six takeaways from the public spat between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. WASHINGTON – If you think the thermonuclear blowout between President Donald Trump and tech billionaire Elon Musk was bad, wait until the asset-splitting part of the divorce gets underway. The battle royale between the world's most powerful man and its richest inhabitant appears to be mostly over, save for some residual skirmishing on the social media platforms separately owned by Trump and Musk. Neither man can convincingly declare himself a winner in the dissolution of a partnership so mutually beneficial that it helped propel one to the White House and the other to even more ungodly amounts of wealth in the form of government contracts and regulatory relief. The fight began over Musk's public criticism of Trump's 'Big Beautiful' budget bill and the projected $2.5 trillion increase it would cause to the federal deficit. But it devolved into a mudslinging spectacle that included Musk publicly accusing Trump of blocking the release of the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking files held by the Justice Department because he's implicated in them. But who will lose most when the proverbial dust from the dustup finally settles? 'I don't think anybody knows,' said veteran Republican political strategist Doug Heye. 'Clearly, what we've seen just in the past few months is that if Trump views you as an enemy, he's going to try and use levers of government against you,' said Heye, a senior official since 1990 who served in the George W. Bush White House, the House and Senate and on the Republican National Committee. 'And it may be that some of his supporters, or a lot of his supporters, want that. We'll have to see.' What does Musk stand to lose? The White House said June 6 that Trump was considering selling the Tesla Model S he purportedly purchased from the CEO of the electric car company when its stock was tanking as a result of Americans opposed to Musk's tactics as head of the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency. More: 'Elon is going to get decimated:' How Trump's feud with the world's richest man might end Within hours of the Trump-Musk fight going public on June 5, Tesla shares dropped 15%, wiping over $100 billion from the company's $1 trillion market value. More broadly, Musk's various companies have benefited from at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits over the past two decades, often at critical moments. Most have come from contracts between his SpaceX satellite firm and the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). And while Musk's myriad businesses are deeply intertwined with the U.S. government in the form of multi-year contracts, his feud with Trump jeopardizes those, too. Also at risk: Musk's burgeoning projects like self-driving cars and trucks, protections from tariffs and other proposed alliances with the government. Musk has also used his Trump connections to sell his Starlink satellite communications services to various U.S. agencies and foreign governments, as well as his The Boring Company tunneling firm, his xAI artificial intelligence firm and other products. More: President Trump threatens Elon Musk's billions in government contracts as alliance craters Without Trump's support, those current and proposed government contracts could dwindle or disappear, though the latter likely would result in protracted litigation. Trump could also, conceivably, sign an executive order to seize SpaceX under the Defense Production Act and even deport Musk for immigration violations, two nuclear options proposed Thursday by former Trump advisor Steve Bannon. What does Trump stand to lose? While Trump controls the levers of government, Musk has at least one ace in the hole – his control over X, which he claims not only handed Trump his November election victory but also Republican control of the House and possibly Senate. Musk is already using X – and his 220.8 million followers on it – to try to turn public opinion against Trump after trashing Trump's deficit-hiking budget bill. Musk said this week he would pull SpaceX's support of its Dragon spaceship that ferries astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station. He's predicted that Trump's tariffs would cause a recession this year. The tech billionaire has also conducted one of his rhetorically slanted polls on X to see how many people want a third political party 'that actually represents the 80% in the middle' between the Republican and Democratic parties. Its results, pinned to the top of Musk's X profile, were predictably in favor of it, 80.4% to 19.6%. Those kinds of broadsides could be a particularly powerful cudgel against Trump just five months into his second term. Musk could also wield a political tactic he's used to help Trump in the past, but this time, financing opponents of his political candidates in the upcoming mid-term elections. A win-win for both Trump and Musk? Heye said that despite all the incendiary rhetoric, there's still room for reconciliation or even a public recoupling. Heye, the veteran GOP official, cited the case of Reince Priebus, Trump's former White House Chief of Staff, who found out Trump fired him on a rainy airport Tarmac in 2017 after traveling with the President on Air Force One. Priebus was forced to find his own way home, Heye said, but soon found himself back in Trump's good graces. 'A relationship with Donald Trump going south is not something new in this political world,' Heye said. 'But Donald Trump always allows people to come back if they say the right things.' Already, Musk has appeared to back down from his threat of taking his Dragon spacecraft out of operation, after an X poster told him, "This is a shame this back and forth. You are both better than this. Cool off and take a step back for a couple days." In response, Musk replied late Thursday, "Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon."
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez endorses Zohran Mamdani in NYC mayoral race
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a key progressive member of the House whose district covers swaths of the Bronx and Queens, endorsed New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani on Thursday for the city's upcoming Democratic mayoral primary -- one day after the candidate clashed with front-runner former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other candidates on the debate stage. "Assemblymember Mamdani has demonstrated a real ability on the ground to put together a coalition of working-class New Yorkers that is strongest to lead the pack. In the final stretch of the race, we need to get very real about that," Ocasio-Cortez told the New York Times in an interview published on Thursday. MORE: Cuomo, Mamdani vie for top spot in NYC Democratic mayoral primary "In 2018, A.O.C. shocked the world and changed our politics for the better with her historic victory. On June 24, we will do the same," Mamdani told the Times in a statement. Mamdani, a state assemblymember and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, has been steadily inching upward in the polls and fundraising. He is running on a progressive platform that includes a rent freeze for rent-stabilized apartments, eliminating fares for New York City buses and opening city-owned grocery stores. Mamdani envisions the latter two being funded by higher taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals; some have cautioned that he would need support from state government for those taxes. Her announcement came the day after a chaotic two-hour debate punctuated by candidates shouting over an increasingly exasperated slate of moderators. Nine Democrats who wish to be New York City's next mayor sparred over how they'd interact with President Donald Trump, public safety, affordability and other topics. Out of those who were onstage, Cuomo leads the pack in polling while Mamdani is slowly closing the gap in second place. The rest of the candidates have struggled to break through. MORE: 'CRAZY': Trump and Musk feud erupts on social media Each candidate was asked how they would work with -- or charge against -- Trump if elected mayor. Cuomo vowed that he is an adversary that Trump could not best. "He can be beaten. But he has to know that he's up against an adversary who can actually beat him. I am the last person on this stage that Mr. Trump wants to see as mayor, and that is why I should be the first choice for the people of the city to have as mayor," Cuomo said. Mamdani, answering the question, said, "I am Donald Trump's worst nightmare, as a progressive Muslim immigrant who actually fights for the things that I believe in, and the difference between myself and Andrew Cuomo is that my campaign is not funded by the very billionaires who put Donald Trump in D.C. ... I have to pick up the phone for the more than 20,000 New Yorkers who contributed an average donation of about $80 to break fundraising records and put our campaign in second place." Cuomo did not directly respond to Mamdani's attack on the debate stage. Some billionaires who have previously supported Trump, such as prominent hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and Home Depot founder Ken Langone, have donated to an independent group, the super PAC Fix the City, that supports Cuomo. Cuomo's campaign is not allowed to coordinate with the group. In response to reporting on Cuomo's wealthy supporters, Fix the City spokesperson Liz Benjamin told the New York Times that "donors have supported Fix the City because they know that Andrew Cuomo has the right experience and the right plans for New York City." Multiple controversies surrounding Cuomo -- including accusations against him of sexual harassment, which he denies -- came up during the debate. Former state assemblymember Michael Blake, while answering a question on public safety, brought up the sexual harassment allegations against Cuomo: "The people who don't feel safe are young women, mothers and grandmothers around Andrew Cuomo, that's the greatest threat to public safety in New York City." Cuomo, later asked about the allegations -- and if he would do anything differently given investigations that alleged his leadership fostered a toxic work environment -- told the moderators, "Let's just make sure we have the facts. A report was done four years ago making certain allegations. I said at the time that it was political and it was false." He added that five district attorneys found "nothing" and he was dropped from one case. "I said at the time that if I offended anyone, it was unintentional, but I apologize, and I say that today."
