The Antelope Valley Times

Your community. Your issues. Your news.

L.A. County Board backs appeal of ruling against enforcement of camping rules

by •

[File]
LOS ANGELES – A divided Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to support an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court of a ruling that prevents local governments from enforcing laws against camping on sidewalks or in other public places unless sufficient alternative shelter space is available.

The board voted 3-2 to file a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the appeal being pursued by the city of Boise, Idaho. The city has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a case dubbed Martin v. Boise.

“The reality is, it has tied our hands in the county and made it more difficult for us to serve our homeless neighbors,” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who co-sponsored the motion with Supervisor Janice Hahn in support of filing the court brief.

Barger said the ruling “places an unworkable burden on this county,” noting that it would take decades to build enough alternative shelter space for the nearly 60,000 homeless people in the county.

In their motion, Barger and Hahn wrote that local governments “need to have the ability to regulate public camping to protect everyone, especially the most vulnerable and in need.”

“Unregulated encampments can create a public health crisis to those inside and outside those encampments,” according to the motion. “The county has already seen the spread of communicable diseases in public areas, with recent outbreaks of medieval-era illnesses such as typhus and tuberculosis. … Anti-camping laws should exist to protect everyone equally. Without the ability to enforce such laws, homeless individuals living in encampments are vulnerable to becoming victims of crime,” the motion states.

Supervisors Sheila Kuehl and Hilda Solis dissented. Kuehl said it “would be a mistake” to put the issue in the hands of “a terrible United States Supreme Court” that might issue an even more onerous ruling. Solis said supporting an appeal of the ruling is akin to supporting the criminalization of homelessness.

“Individuals experiencing homelessness can’t be criminalized for sitting, lying or sleeping on public property when there is insufficient housing or shelter,” Solis said. “The fact is that we don’t have enough shelters.

“… I don’t think this is going to solve the problem, and I don’t think I want to be part of that group that will criminalize people for sleeping on the street,” Solis said.

More than six dozen people spoke out on the issue during the board meeting, many of them pleading with the board not to support the appeal. Many said the homeless should not be subjected to citations or prosecution when they have no other alternatives for housing.

David Busch of the Services Not Sweeps Coalition issued a statement accusing the board of “working hand-in-glove with (President) Donald Trump” in a push “to remove the fundamental 8th Amendment constitutional rights they (the homeless) must rely on to protect themselves.”

Eric Tars, an attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the original lawsuit against the city of Boise, said recently the 9th Circuit ruling does not handcuff local governments in their dealings with the homeless.

“The simple fact is that every human being needs a safe, legal place to sleep,” Tars told the Idaho Statesman. “Far from crippling cities, the 9th Circuit’s decision recognizes this truth and leaves cities a wide range of constructive ways of addressing homelessness which are more effective, and cost-effective, than continuing to lock people up or give them fines for simply needing to sleep safely at night.”

–

36 comments for "L.A. County Board backs appeal of ruling against enforcement of camping rules"

  1. Setting up a tent in the middle of a sidewalk is just pure premadonna laziness. people who have truley struggled to get a job and stay sanitized know how to sleep in secret while leaving the very least amount of biological footprints and little at time they find respectable shelter and become productive civilians. If someone wants that, it could happen. the bums in those tents on the sidewalks dont care if you step on their human waste and catch the sickness theyve created. they just want their fix and they want the world to feel sorry for them. some of them live to troll others because thats all they feel that theyve got. Local governments may be hindered from stopping them but a resident or business owner can just put laundry detergent around the tent and soak the tent and surroundings with a high pressure water hose until all that typhus and ciphalis runs in the gutter and the bums finaly packs their soaked belongings and goes away. there is a difference between a bum, a prodigal son, and a homeless person struggling to get back on his feet. In conclusion, a high pressure water hose and laundry detergent should do the trick.

    • I hope you try that. Spraying someone with a hose is assault, and you are likely to get your ass whipped. I’d buy a ticket.

  2. Well, while the elephant and the donkey are busy hurling insults at each other, the homeless situation has reached a crisis situation in California. No doubt, all the diseases that accompany this crisis will take it’s toll on these poor human souls. The elephant and the donkey are so focused on hating each other that they aren’t even aware of the damage they’re causing.

      • Don Quixote would be mortified, and I wouldn’t blame him as he probably had more class than either party. Washington specifically warned us about splitting into parties in his farewell address.

        He said: Avoid partisanship and parties, debt, foreign entanglements and educate the citizenry.

        Good job, America.

          • Let’s start a new party….How about The Miscreant Party, TMP. Or Party of Miscreants, POM.

            Nah, you’re a …….Kag, retch, Kag……….Democrat….retch.

          • Maybe you could have one and call it the “Donner Party” where you eat your own.

            The GOP has a similar idea called “primarying Republican incumbents” as a model.

            They taste like “chickens” I hear. Old stewing chickens like Lindsey Graham of the indeterminate gender Grahams of Newport.

      • If the struggling bum could get over the feelings that the world owes them, they could purhaps better themselves by getting any job and finaly represent the Elephant or Ass.

          • I don’t have any talents at all. That’s why I hang out here.

            Although I have been know to blow my own horn occasionally.

          • Trumpist#1

            Your wrote that blow your own horn occasionally.

            I had to restrain myself from replying to that as I wanted to.

            You’re welcome.

          • Hey, Trumpist#1

            When I go on vacation, can you take over for me? It’s easy like martial arts. You take their comments and turn them back on them.

            They think they’re so smart that they offer themselves up for it like…………….like……….like mushrooms for the pickin’

            William

          • You heard it straight from the donkey’s computer to your eyes, Trumpist. He gifted you with his genius method of operation, like…….like……. mushrooms for the picking. Maybe he’s confusing the edible mushrooms with the other mushrooms that he dries and smokes, causing hallucinations. Happy to see you’re both drooling sycophants for each other now. It’s much better than your relationship before.

          • No human can duplicate William’s unique function here as well as he does, and I pale in comparison in ability and spirit. Stupid commenters would consider it their own vacation if William wasn’t here to set us straight, be provocative and increase interest. As far as being an ass, that’s the only part I could handle effortlessly.

            And I’d much rather laugh with commenters than argue viciously, because there’s always plenty of other arguments to engage in and enjoy here.

            So no vacations for you. We need you here. I, on the other hand, am off on glorious holiday forthwith.

          • Alexis, you’re absolutely right! He should absolutely share them mushrooms!

            And I have more fun messing with him (and you) than arguing. I like to argue but there’s plenty of fools to argue with here without yours and William’s intellects and senses of humor.

          • I’ll leave the mushroom picking for you both to do; you’re better at that than I. You can pick the ones on the right, and William can pick the ones on the left. He’s the very smart donkey, and you’re the very smart elephant.

          • I’m an Independent, not an elephant (William once tagged me as InDepends, lol).

            If I could choose the symbol for the Independent party, it would probably be the:

            1) vulture
            1) skunk
            3) rat
            4) armadillo
            5) snake
            6) chameleon

          • So, Trumpist#1

            Members of your newly created political parties would be called

            1. a venue of vultures.
            2. a surfeit of skunks
            3. a plague of rats
            4. a fez of armadillos
            5. a knot of snakes
            6. a starship of chameleons

            Of, you could name it the Alexis Party.
            Members would be a “charm of Alexi”

  3. Thank goodness none of them echoed Rex’s call to have citizens carry loaded weapons illegally and shoot the homeless if they tried to rob you. They apparently are not as stupid, callous, or unhinged as our beloved mayor is.

  4. “Kuehl said it “would be a mistake” to put the issue in the hands of “a terrible United States Supreme Court”.

    It’s amazing to me that an elected official would say that about an institution that should be above the fray, to anyone with any patriotism whatsoever. More proof that CA/MX is a hybrid third-world country, no longer part of mainstream US.

    • As you said, they are an “elected official.” Of course they will pepper in their political opinions. They have a constituency to “impress.”

    • What do you expect when the GOP has totally politicized the court, and crows constantly about how they have stacked it with ideologues who they expect will legislate from the bench?

      • Sad that we’ve come to that from both sides. When I was a kid almost everyone respected all branches of government (I like being a dinosaur).

  5. “In their motion, Barger and Hahn wrote that local governments “need to have the ability to regulate public camping to protect everyone…”

    Barger and Hahn actually get it.

    • No, they actually don’t. Key words from the court’s ruling: “unless sufficient alternative shelter space is available.” If a city wants to enforce rules against public camping all they have to do is provide adequate alternatives. Barger, Hahn, and apparently you seem to be leaning towards “well, you can’t camp so I guess you need to…I dunno…levitate maybe? Or, hey, suicide is an option.”

    • Plague: You are right, they do get it. Now, only cooperation is needed. I don’t hear any better ideas from the commenters that think they know what they’re talking about. Unless you are an advocate for the homeless, and know what’s going on, then you don’t have a clue.