PHOENIX — A Senate panel voted Tuesday to provide $50 million through federal funds to help cities and counties deal with homelessness.
But in order to get a share of the money, communities could be forced to arrest and lock up some people now living on the streets.
Sen. David Livingston, R-Peoria, told the Appropriations Committee that Senate Bill 1581 aims to motivate communities to create centralized locations where the homeless can camp. That ensures people can get a safe place to clean up and stow their belongings as well as find services they need, he said.
Cities and counties that seek their share of the funds would have to agree to a set of conditions, including providing sanitary facilities, potable water and on-site security, as well as establishing safety rules.
The ability of local governments to tap into $30 million of the money — the rest would be earmarked for nonprofit organizations — would be contingent on having ordinances that prohibit sleeping and camping in public places that are not designated as “sanctioned camping sites.’’ The city or county would also have to enforce those ordinances.
“The strings attached to this money come at a too high cost and will only serve to exacerbate the current factors that drive people into poverty and homelessness,’’ said Hugo Polanco, lobbyist for Wildfire. That organization, successor to the Arizona Community Action Association, focuses on poverty issues.
This isn’t just a philosophical issue. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2019 that people who are homeless cannot be punished for sleeping outside on public property unless the community also offers adequate alternatives.
There was no evidence presented Tuesday that such alternatives exist in most communities. In fact, proponents said the tent centers the legislation would encourage are designed to account for that lack.
Despite that, only Sen. Raquel Teran, D-Phoenix, voted against the measure. She said the 2019 ruling voiding an ordinance out of Boise, Idaho makes the measure not just illegal but unworkable.
Those arguments did not sway others, albeit for vastly different reasons.
Sen. Lela Alston, D-Phoenix, said she is relying on promises by proponents to find ways to deal with the legal issues before the measure goes to the full Senate.
Sen. Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City, had a different take.
He told colleagues he sees nothing wrong with arresting those who are sleeping on streets. Borrelli said he sees some benefit from such a move because nearly 600 homeless people died on Phoenix streets in the last year.
“I’d rather have somebody do a night in jail, get cleaned up and a hot meal than end up in a body bag,’’ he said.
Sen. David Gowan, R-Sierra Vista, seemed ready to take on the legal system.
He acknowledged that the 9th Circuit ruling is binding on Arizona and other Western states. But Gowan said there has yet to be a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue.
That’s not exactly true: The justices refused to consider a bid by Boise to revisit the issue, leaving the 9th Circuit decision in place.
Wednesday’s committee vote followed a parade of witnesses, including residents or owners of businesses in areas where the homeless have taken up residence on streets.
“There are days when I can’t access my business,’’ complained Angela Ojile, who said efforts to sell or lease her property in Phoenix are stymied by the situation.
Ojile said she welcomes a comprehensive approach. “We feel like it’s been Band-Aided so far,’’ she said.
Caroline Lobo, who lives in the Sunnyslope area of Phoenix, said “kids can’t walk to school because they come across needles and feces on the street.”
Joan Serviss, executive director of the Arizona Housing Coalition, cautioned lawmakers against approving the measure, at least in its current form with the requirement of communities to enact and enforce laws against sleeping on streets. She said that could cause the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the source of the federal funding, to find the state is ignoring the law and withdraw the money.
Fiscal issues aside, Serviss said she’s not convinced the proposal is a good idea. “As professionals working to advocate for affordable homes and an end to homelessness, we do not believe structured camping facilities, tent cities, safe parking lots are the best practice,’’ she said.
“What does end someone’s homelessness is housing,’’ Serviss continued. “And the $30 million earmarked to cities to establish sanctioned camping sites, and $20 million to nonprofits, could be far better invested into the State Housing Trust Fund to create permanent supportive housing and to keep people stably housed through eviction prevention, housing case management and the like.’’
