<\/p>\n
South Phoenix Councilwoman Anna Hernandez ripped the parks measure as someone from her office held signs up that called attention to new pressures on poor people.\u00a0<\/p>\n
(Youtube)<\/p>\n
Phoenix is gearing up for a new order in parks after City Council voted 6-3 to restrict their use for distributing food and medical treatments \u2014 including needle exchanges \u2014 to unsheltered people.<\/p>\n
The vote followed nearly five hours of discussion and impassioned among council members as well as dozens of advocates for the homeless, including a number of nonprofits.<\/p>\n
Some of the most passionate statements came from council members themselves on both sides of the issue.<\/p>\n
Voting against the measure were members Laura Pastor, Anna Hernandez and Jim Waring \u2014 but for different reasons.<\/p>\n
Hernandez blasted the restrictions as an aide showed signs calling attention to the reduction in food stamp recipients and other federal actions that have hit poor people.<\/p>\n
Pastor did not specially say why she was voting against the measure, but had asked if food distribution could be removed from the ordinance.<\/p>\n
And Waring said he was voting against it because he felt no food distribution or medical treatment of any kind should be allowed in city parks.<\/p>\n
Mayor Kate Gallego called attention to the enormous expenditure of taxpayer dollars the city already is making to help homeless people, from finding shelter to providing heat relief.<\/p>\n
Pointing to City Manager Ed Zuercher\u2019s statement that the city is spending $40 million a year on those services \u2014 compared with a state expenditure of only about $5 million \u2014 Gallego noted Phoenix supports 83% of all shelter beds in the Valley. Additionally, the city has spent roughly $75 million on infrastructure to help unsheltered people, including shelter beds.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf other cities stepped up, we could address this much more quickly,\u201d she said. \u201cThere are many cities that don’t have a single facility. So we are stepping up in the City of Phoenix.\u201d<\/p>\n
The city also is proposing to spend in next fiscal year $379,000 to enforce the ordinance. It is funding three positions to manage the permitting process as well as provide additional money for field staff that will be observing compliance with the ordinance and talking with nonprofits providing the services.<\/p>\n
Deputy City Manager Cynthia Aguilar said the city is prepared to enforce the ordinance as soon as it takes effect June 5.<\/p>\n
She also noted that the city has received complaints about conditions in 40 of the city\u2019s 189 parks that are created by unregulated good and medical services nonprofits run for the homeless.<\/p>\n
Those conditions include food and medical waste \u2014 including used syringes. Previous testimony on the measure indicated that parks employees cleaning up after some of these events have had to be treated for needle pricks.<\/p>\n
The ordinance will require food and medical distributors to apply for permits to use city parks \u2014 and only those with parking lots.<\/p>\n
No single nonprofit can get more than two permits a month and there will be an internal appeal process for those whose applications are denied. The application process is free.<\/p>\n
Violators will be subject to citations that are the equivalent of traffic tickets.<\/p>\n
Permitted services must take place in parking lots or other hardscape areas, not open park spaces; be conducted inside enclosed tents or mobile medical units; be overseen by licensed medical professionals; and include removal of all medical waste.<\/p>\n
There are 105 parks where such permitted activities would be allowed.<\/p>\n
Permit holders would also be required to carry insurance and agree to indemnification.<\/p>\n
City Attorney Julie Kriegh agreed with Councilwoman Kesha Hodge Washington, who said it was important for the groups to have insurance \u201cbecause when something goes awry, whether or not it’s a kid that gets pricked by a needle or some other cause, they normally file a litigation against the city of Phoenix, and we are the one usually left holding the bag.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd similarly if someone in the district is distributing food that is unsafe in the parks and we are unable to identify (the individual), again the liability comes back to us and we are tasked with then making a decision on how much taxpayer funds we use to resolve the litigation,\u201d Hodge Washington said.<\/p>\n
Kriegh also noted that under state Proposition 312, residents who can\u2019t use the parks because of unregulated medical and food distribution activities could ask for reimbursement of their property taxes.<\/p>\n
The ordinance also prohibits the sale or exchange of syringes or needles and needle exchange programs as well as the distribution of injectable naloxone.<\/p>\n
However, it explicitly allows the use and distribution of intranasal naloxone, including in emergencies.<\/p>\n
The rules would not apply to first responders, licensed professionals acting within their duties, individuals providing emergency assistance, and family members caring for relatives.<\/p>\n
The ordinance also does not apply to family or other social gatherings where food is served.<\/p>\n
Rachel Milne, Office of Homeless Solutions director, also noted that \u201ctransportation is the core\u201d of many services the city provides homeless people, providing rides to take them to services, including shelter.<\/p>\n
She also said counselors, caseworkers and social workers will be working to provide services for homeless people who attend the permitted activities in parks.<\/p>\n
Councilmembers Kevin Robinson and Brenda Stark noted that the ordinance strikes a balance between helping the homeless and keeping the parks opened for taxpayers and residents.<\/p>\n
Aguilar earlier said that resident response to the ordinance fell into two camps.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe heard from a lot of residents who just couldn’t wrap their mind around allowing these services in parks and really expressing the sentiment that parks are not appropriate places for these types of activities,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
\u201cAnd then we also heard from residents who understand and understand that the services are better suited to have parameters versus not having parameters.\u201d<\/p>\n
Stark talked about working class people in her district who couldn\u2019t use their neighborhood parks. In one case, a church that conducted food distribution refused to halt the service one day despite neighbors\u2019 pleas that it would ruin a long-planned community event.<\/p>\n
She said she represents many residents who \u201csolely rely on the parks.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey can\u2019t go to private gyms or get private swimming lessons,\u201d Stark said. \u201cSo we really did try to strike a compromise with this ordinance.\u201d<\/p>\n
Councilwoman Betty Guardado noted that Phoenix has spent $14 million over the last seven years to enhance parks with new playgrounds and other amenities and that residents are entitled to enjoy them without hassles.<\/p>\n
Waring called the ordinance \u201ca vanity project\u201d and condemned the use of aprks for any services for homeless people, stating, \u201cWe need to reevaluate the course we\u2019re on.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hernandez condemned the ordinance for the opposite reason, saying. The city was taking this action \u201cat a time when the dederal social safety nets are under attack by the Trump Administration.\u201d<\/p>\n
She said the passage of the ordinance would \u201cbreak the trust\u201d with the community of unsheltered people and their advocates because it is \u201cmore punitive, restrictive and more disconnected from evidence-based and data-driving policymaking.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cLocal governments must act with heightened ethical responsibility, not increased restrictions,\u201d Hernandez added.<\/p>\n
Robinson said many of his constituents opposite any services in parks.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think it is a compromise,\u201d he said of the ordinance. \u201cAnd as far as I am concerned, I think it gives a little bit to everybody, not everything everybody wants. And again, that’s life. That’s how things work. I truly take my hat off to the Office of Homeless Solutions, everything that they do, everything that they try to do and everything that they’re willing to do.\u201d<\/p>\n
He said by allowing permitted activities, the city \u201cis looking out for those who are the most vulnerable among us, and we have a responsibility to do that.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut what I’ve been hearing time and time again is we want our parks to be safe, and I know everybody wants that. \u2026Folks don’t necessarily agree that parks should be used for something other than recreation and for families and residents to use. So I think this is a good compromise.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"South Phoenix Councilwoman Anna Hernandez ripped the parks measure as someone from her office held signs up that…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":804698,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[5131],"tags":[5229,123376,5643,1587,126758,122170,132987,153913,1589,67,586,132,5230,68,2969],"class_list":["post-804697","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-phoenix","tag-america","tag-anna-hernandez","tag-arizona","tag-az","tag-ed-zuercher","tag-jim-waring","tag-laura-pastor","tag-mayor-kate-gallego","tag-phoenix","tag-united-states","tag-united-states-of-america","tag-unitedstates","tag-unitedstatesofamerica","tag-us","tag-usa"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/116594706288272693","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/804697","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=804697"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/804697\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/804698"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=804697"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=804697"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=804697"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}