Fresno’s anti-camping ordinance will officially take effect on Sep. 15.
Thursday, the Fresno City Council approved the anti-camping ordinance on a 5-1 vote, with Council President Annalisa Perea voting against it and Councilman Luis Chavez absent.
Flashback: The council voted 7-0 to approve of the ordinance’s introduction on July 29, bringing the ordinance back after it had initially hit the books in 2017.
- The 2017 ordinance was rendered dead when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals banned anti-camping ordinances if cities do not have enough shelter beds for its homeless community.
- But the Supreme Court overturned rulings from the appellate court, legalizing anti-camping bans and allowing local governments to fine violators.
The big picture: Fresno’s ordinance will ban people from sitting, laying, sleeping or camping in public places.
- Violators may be fined up to $1,000 and be jailed for up to one year if they refuse to move.
- The city will give people 24 hours notice to remove any property and offer services and shelter to the homeless before resorting to fines and arrests.
State of play: As has happened at previous meetings, dozens of people spoke in opposition to the ordinance during the public comment section of the meeting.
- Perea broke with her colleagues to cast the lone vote against it, even though she had supported it when it was introduced.
- Perea said she will watch how the ordinance is implemented in the city and commits to bringing amendments forward, if needed, to better serve the community.
What she’s saying: “It appears [the ordinance] is really broad in nature. I do agree with the community in that, and that’s resulted in a lot of confusion. Much of what was stated today in the audience was inaccurate, but I understand because the language was vague, very confusing,” Perea said. “And I think it sends the wrong message to the community as to what our actual intent is for this item.”
- She continued, “I don’t want that to dilute the good work that we have done here in the city for the unhoused community. I believe the intent was missed, and while I personally would like more time to work with my colleagues to better define the ordinance and to make it clear as to what exactly we are trying to achieve, I believe the council as a whole is ready to vote on this today.”
