HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/13/2021 Item 2, Ulz
Wilbanks, Megan
From:Eva Ulz <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Ordinance regarding tents as encroachments
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear Mayor and City Councilors,
I am writing to ask that you do NOT approve the proposed amendment to chapters 12.04 and 12.20 of the City's
Municipal Code regarding tents in City parks. This ordinance unfairly targets our most vulnerable and disadvantaged
citizens for the exact same behavior that is encouraged in residents and visitors who can afford to pay for the privilege of
getting drunk in public.
Despite Staff's assurance that the proposed ordinance does not specifically target the unhoused, it is clear that they are
the only class who will be at all impacted. The ordinance is intended not only to limit the use of tents for privacy and
shelter from the elements, but to discourage the homeless from occupying any public spaces where they can be seen by
housed residents. After reading the staff report that accompanies this item, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the
Parks Department believes the mere presence of our unhoused neighbors is so aesthetically distasteful that everyone
else will be dissuaded from using City parks.
The fact that a use is permitted is only a presumption against nuisance -- it is not dispositive. The current explosion of
sidewalk dining and alcohol consumption that has overtaken downtown SLO since the pandemic is far more annoying to
the average resident than the presence of a few tents at the edge of a City park. I am now forced to dash and in and out
of the street when I walk to and from work every day because the sidewalks are completely occupied by people eating
and drinking, including consuming large amounts of alcohol.
How can the City condone public consumption of alcohol that completely blocks the right of way on downtown sidewalks
while simultaneously banning the flimsy shelters to which our most vulnerable residents retreat to keep warm during
winter weather because someone "might" be drinking alcohol inside without admitting the stark difference between the
way that wealthier residents and visitors are treated when compared with our homeless population?
I understand the need to reduce violent and threatening behavior in City parks, however eliminating tents is not the most
logical solution to this problem. The proposed ordinance seeks to hide the City's homeless crisis from view by eradicating
vulnerable citizens from one of the few spaces where they are allowed to exist. Martin v. City of Boise 902 F.3d 1031
(2018) held that criminalizing sleeping outside on public property when they have nowhere else to go violates the Eighth
Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. I cannot see how forcing someone to sleep outside without
a wind break during the winter complies with the spirit of this ruling.
The City has other options to control unlawful behavior in parks. A blank ban on tents in all publicly owned property is
overly broad and incredibly cruel and it does not actually correct the problem the Parks Department claims it wants to
solve.
1
Sincerely,
Eva Ulz
2