logo
Conference attendees decry bill banning unauthorized camping, sleeping on public land

Conference attendees decry bill banning unauthorized camping, sleeping on public land

Yahoo16-05-2025

Graphic: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
As many as 170 communities have enacted ordinances banning unauthorized camping and sleeping since last June when the U.S. Supreme Court okayed them, Donald Whitehead, executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, told attendees of the 'Bringing it Home 2025' conference in Raleigh on Thursday.
Fining, jailing or ticketing someone experiencing homelessness for unauthorized camping or sleeping outside will not solve the homelessness problem, said Whitehead, the event's keynote speaker. He urged conference participants to fight against proposed legislation in North Carolina that would make unauthorized camping and sleeping illegal.
'I'm asking you today, before you leave this conference, call your representative in Washington, in the state House, make sure that North Carolina doesn't become included in those communities that are criminalizing homelessness,' Whitehead said.
Whitehead was referring to House Bill 781, which is winding its way through the General Assembly. The bill would ban unauthorized camping and sleeping on public property and allow local governments by 'majority vote' to designate local government-owned property 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.
Whitehead shared that a 2014 study in Osceola, Florida found that 37 chronically homeless people were arrested approximately 1,250 times at a cost of more than $6 million to the community.
'We know, if you jail, fine or arrest somebody, it does not solve homelessness,' Whitehead said. 'Criminalization is not the solution, but those are local decisions, and the only way we can have an impact on those local solutions, those local issues, is that we have to be advocates in our community beyond the service.'
Rep. Brian Biggs (R-Randolph), a cosponsor of HB 781 has pushed back against claims the bill criminalizes homelessness.
'This bill does not criminalize homelessness,' Biggs insisted. 'It addresses unauthorized public property camping and sleeping without prohibiting homelessness itself.'
Biggs has said HB 781 grew out of conversations with municipal leaders who asked for guidance around handling the state's growing homeless crisis. He said the state can no longer wait to address the problem.
Speaking just ahead of Whitehead on Thursday, Gov. Josh Stein also took aim at HB 781, contrasting it with bills introduced this session that are designed to increase affordable housing stock. Stein said lawmakers have put forward 'many creative solutions' to address the state's housing shortage, such as a proposal to allow developers to build new housing in any area zoned for commercial, retail or office use without having to rezone the property.
'They're [lawmakers] thinking boldly about how we can increase housing supply, and this is certainly an issue where there is a possibility for bipartisan solutions,' Stein said. 'On the other hand, we are seeing efforts at the General Assembly to make sleeping in a park a crime. No one should have to sleep outside. It's a real problem, but we need to find real solutions by connecting people with supportive services and putting more roofs over more heads.'
Bans on authorized camping and sleeping are coming as the rate of homelessness is rising, Whitehead said.
'Last year, we had the highest number of people experiencing homelessness in the history of our country, at least since it's been measured by Congress, which goes back to the early 2000s, over 770,000 people (an 18% increase over the previous year),' Whitehead said.
HUD's 2024 Annual Homelessness Assessment Report (AHAR) found that the number of people experiencing homelessness increased in every category — except for veterans — measured during the department's annual Point-in-Time (PIT) Count. The count is a snapshot of the number of individuals in shelters, temporary housing and unsheltered on a single night.
The Founding Fathers in the Preamble to the Constitution promised U.S. citizens life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Whitehead said.
'You can't pursue happiness sleeping under a bridge,' Whitehead said. 'There is no liberty when you are fined, jailed or ticketed because you can't afford a place to live. You cannot pursue happiness if you lay your head in the back of an automobile.'
State advocates for people experiencing homelessness contend HB 781 will diminishes local autonomy while making cities and counties both fiscally responsible and legally liable for the implementing state-sanctioned encampment policies. The NC Coalition to End Homelessness (NCCEH) has also expressed concern that the proposal is being pushed by 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.
The institute was founded by tech-industry capitalist Joe Lonsdale, who is critical of the 'housing first' approach to ending homelessness. That model prioritizes providing individuals and families with permanent, affordable housing as the first step in ending their plight.
'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. Agard said Cicero's policies promote industries that will potentially profit from criminalizing poverty. '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,' Agard said.
Both Stein and Whitehead expressed concerns about proposed federal budget cuts to eliminate Section 8 housing.
'More than 25,000 people in North Carolina depend on Section 8 to have a home they can't afford to have that support taken away from them, and we cannot afford it either,' Stein said. 'Let's work to expand access to housing, not take it away.'
Stein said he's also concerned about proposed cuts to Medicaid and the SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.) The SNAP program, once referred to as Food Stamps, provides low-income families with food for an adequate diet.
'These cuts pose a serious threat to the wallets and wellbeing of so many hard-working families here in North Carolina,' Stein said. 'Cuts to essential needs like health care and food make it that much harder for people to afford housing, and they'll make it even harder for our state to afford to support our people.'
Whitehead said the proposed cuts to the nation's social safety net programs would push more people into homelessness and cause harm to those who are already unsheltered.
'If that budget goes through, it would be a devastating impact on people experiencing homelessness,' he said. 'I don't know who you voted for, but I don't think you voted for an 80% reduction in HUD [U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development] staff or $1 trillion worth of cuts between Medicaid and the SNAP program — I don't think that's what you voted for — and all of that in order to be able to enact a $45 trillion tax cut, which benefits people at the top of the economic ladder.'
Devdutta Sangvai, the N.C. Secretary of Health and Human Services, said that in the coming days the proposed Medicaid and SNAP cuts will be widely discussed. Sangvai reminded conferences attendees that both are connected to housing.
'Behavioral Health is connected to housing. Housing is connected to child care. Child Care is connected to the economy,' Sangvai said. 'We do not have to artificially connect the dots to make a point. It is proven. There are data out there to support that. And so we really need to understand that if we don't address the homelessness issue in the housing crisis, it poses a direct threat to the stability and economic well being of North Carolina.'
Bring It Home 2025 is sponsored by the N.C. Housing Coalition, the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services and the N.C. Coalition to End Homelessness. The conference concludes Friday.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Lawsuit challenging Kentucky's near-total ban on abortions is withdrawn
Lawsuit challenging Kentucky's near-total ban on abortions is withdrawn

Yahoo

time8 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Lawsuit challenging Kentucky's near-total ban on abortions is withdrawn

Attorneys for a woman who sued Kentucky seeking to restore the right to an abortion have dropped their challenge to the state's near-total ban on the procedure. The attorneys filed a motion Friday to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit, but did not give a reason for seeking to drop the case. The lawsuit had been filed last year in state court in Louisville on behalf of a woman who was seven weeks pregnant at the time and identified only by the pseudonym Mary Poe to protect her privacy. The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which had represented the woman, said in a statement it would not give additional details about the dismissal. 'People have the right to control their own bodies without government interference, and we will never stop fighting to restore abortion access in Kentucky,' said Amber Duke, executive director of the ACLU of Kentucky. 'We are strategizing our next steps in this fight.' The lawsuit was challenging Kentucky's near-total trigger law ban and a separate six-week ban, both of which were passed by Republican legislative majorities. The trigger law took effect after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. 'Kentuckians can be proud that our pro-life values won the day today and innocent lives will continue to be saved as a result,' Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman, a Republican, posted on X. The trigger law bans abortions except to save the life of the patient or to prevent disabling injury. It does not include exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Republican lawmakers earlier this year inserted several new medical exceptions, though abortion-rights supporters said the exceptions don't add clarity and in fact undermine the judgment of doctors by remaining silent on other situations.

Lawsuit challenging Kentucky's near-total ban on abortions is withdrawn

time9 hours ago

Lawsuit challenging Kentucky's near-total ban on abortions is withdrawn

Attorneys for a woman who sued Kentucky seeking to restore the right to an abortion have dropped their challenge to the state's near-total ban on the procedure. The attorneys filed a motion Friday to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit, but did not give a reason for seeking to drop the case. The lawsuit had been filed last year in state court in Louisville on behalf of a woman who was seven weeks pregnant at the time and identified only by the pseudonym Mary Poe to protect her privacy. The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which had represented the woman, said in a statement it would not give additional details about the dismissal. 'People have the right to control their own bodies without government interference, and we will never stop fighting to restore abortion access in Kentucky,' said Amber Duke, executive director of the ACLU of Kentucky. 'We are strategizing our next steps in this fight.' The lawsuit was challenging Kentucky's near-total trigger law ban and a separate six-week ban, both of which were passed by Republican legislative majorities. The trigger law took effect after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. 'Kentuckians can be proud that our pro-life values won the day today and innocent lives will continue to be saved as a result,' Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman, a Republican, posted on X. The trigger law bans abortions except to save the life of the patient or to prevent disabling injury. It does not include exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Republican lawmakers earlier this year inserted several new medical exceptions, though abortion-rights supporters said the exceptions don't add clarity and in fact undermine the judgment of doctors by remaining silent on other situations.

Griffith likes budget bill, wants 3-judge panel to oversee injunctions
Griffith likes budget bill, wants 3-judge panel to oversee injunctions

Yahoo

time11 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Griffith likes budget bill, wants 3-judge panel to oversee injunctions

bluefield – U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., admits there is no such thing as a perfect bill. But he believes there is much to like in the so-called 'Big, Beautiful Bill' recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. Griffith, who represents Virginia's Ninth Congressional District in the House, spoke on a wide range of issues during a visit to the Daily Telegraph, including the budget bill and the growing debate over whether district court judges have the power to block much of President Donald Trump's agenda. In recent months, district court judges have issued injunctions blocking many of Trump's executive orders. Those injunctions will eventually make their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to Griffith. But until then Griffith said legislation already passed by the Republican-controlled House — and awaiting action in the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate — would address the issue of judicial overreach. That bill would establish a three-judge panel that would consider any nationwide injunction. 'We passed it out of the House a month and a half ago,' Griffith said of the proposed legislation. 'It's sitting in the body of the Senate. It's hard to predict what the Senate will do. They may or may not move it forward.' Using Southwest Virginia as an example, Griffith said a district court judge in the Western District of Virginia shouldn't be able to issue a nationwide injunction blocking the actions of the President of the United States. Griffith said the district court should be making local decisions that impact Bluefield, Va., Richlands and Roanoke Va. — three cities that are located in the Western District — but should not be empowered to issue a nationwide injunction blocking a presidential order. Under the proposed legislation, Griffith said a component of the U.S. Supreme Court would select three judges at random that would consider any cases involving a nationwide injunction of a presidential order. 'I think it gets you a better decision,' Griffith said of a three-judge panel. 'You should have more than one judge making that decision.' As it stands now, Griffith said those who are seeking nationwide injunctions also are seeking out district court judges that they think may be more favorable to their viewpoint. By having a component of the Supreme Court to select three judges at random, it helps to ensure there will be no inherent biases in any decisions that are rendered, according to Griffith. Griffith also talked about the federal budget bill recently passed by the U.S. House, and its chances of remaining intact in the U.S. Senate. 'The bill is not perfect,' Griffith said. 'There is things in the bill I don't like, particularly the SALT tax increase.' The debate over the SALT tax surrounds the cap on federal deductions for state and local taxes. The House passed a bill increasing the cap to $40,000. But some conservatives argue the move is essentially a federal subsidy for blue states at the expense of red states. Griffith said the citizens of Southwest Virginia don't support providing a tax break to California or New York. 'In the Senate, there are not senators who represent SALT states,' Griffith said. 'So will the Senate pull SALT out? I think they will pass something similar to what we passed, or nothing at all.' Parts of the budget bill that Griffith said he likes includes taking the tax off tips and taking the tax off hourly wage overtime. The bill also includes a provision to help with the development of coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities. Griffith described it as a 'revolving loan fund' that would provide protection to those developers if a future Democrat-led administration is elected and orders those coal, natural gas and nuclear facilities to be closed. Griffith said Democrats also continue to misrepresent the work requirement for abled-bodied adults in Medicaid and those cuts that are proposed for Medicaid over a 10-year period in the budget bill. According to Griffith, the traditional Medicaid population consists of individuals with disabilities, pregnant mothers, children and seniors. He said the work requirements in the reconciliation budget bill do not apply to this traditional Medicaid population. The work requirement in Medicaid expansion would only apply to able-bodied people aged 19-64 who do not have a young child, a disabled person or an elderly relative in need of care living in the home, according to Griffith. Griffith said the bill requires these able-bodied adults on Medicaid expansion to be engaged in their community for 80 hours a month. With 4.33 weeks in a month, that means an average of 18.47 hours a week. Griffith said those requirements promote community engagement, adding that community engagement can be community service, pursuing educational programs, participating in a rehabilitation program or a job. By working to improve their communities and their own lives, Griffith said some of these individuals will be lifted out of poverty, depression and isolation. 'But if you are able-bodied and sitting at home, you should be trying to get out there and educate yourself, help your community with community service or find a job for a small part of the week,' he said. At the end of the day, Griffith said Republicans had to compromise in order to get the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' passed. It's passage in the Republican-controlled House was by a slim margin of 215-214. Griffith also was asked about the auto-pen investigation by the House, and whether or not former President Joe Biden was fully aware of a number of pardons and executive orders that were signed by the so-called auto-pen. A number of individual who are not charged with any type of crime were pardoned by Biden anyhow in the waning days of his presidency. House Republicans are investigating a number of pardons and executive orders that were signed using the autopen. Griffith said the courts will have to take a 'serious look' at the issue, adding that the question will center around the former president's mental state when those pardons and executive orders were issued. If Biden was unable to act upon those executive orders and pardons on his on, Griffith said the responsibility of those decisions should have then fallen upon former Vice President Kamala Harris. Griffith also was asked about this November's gubernatorial election in Virginia, and a handful of polls that show Democrat Abigail Spanberger with a large lead over Republican Winsome Earle-Sears in the closely-watched governor's race. Incumbent Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin can't seek re-election. In Virginia, a candidate can only serve as governor for a single term. Griffith said the polls will tighten as it gets closer to Election Day. He said voter turnout in Southwest Virginia will be key to Republicans winning the governor's race — just as it was four years ago when voters across Southwest Virginia came out in large numbers to support Youngkin. That large voter turnout across Southwest Virginia tipped the scales in favor of Republicans, Griffith said. 'There is no question that Southwest Virginia put Youngkin over the top,' Griffith said. 'There is no question about it. It was a big turnout. We've got to have the same thing now. If the turnout happens in Southwest Virginia, Winsome Sears who I have known for 20 years can win.' Contact Charles Owens at cowens@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store