By a 34-16 vote, a Jarret Coleman sponsored bill taking aim at unauthorized homeless encampments passed the state senate on June 25. The Lehigh Valley's other two state senators, Lisa Boscola and Nick Miller, also voted for this measure. The bill now advances to the state house.
I have a cousin who lives in LA. When he left the Lehigh Valley, he was a Democrat. Now he's a conservative Republican. One of the things that has really bothered him is the number of homeless encampments on city sidewalks. Things there have become so bad that Governor Gavin Newsom is urging and even threatening cities and counties to ban these tent cities. And in his NYC Mayoral campaign, former Governor Andrew Cuomo pledged to get homeless people out of subways.
The prime sponsor of this bill, Senator Joe Picozzi, framed the issue as one of "public safety, health and welfare for neighborhoods." He observed that these encampments bring " trash accumulation, drug paraphernalia, crime, risks from open flames, and blighted conditions."
Under the bill, an "unauthorized encampment" is an "encampment on public or private property, without the property owner's express consent or authorization, where an ndication of nuisance exists."
It imposes a duty on property owners, including municipalities, to "prevent, mitigate and abate any condition of nuisance on the property." It also creates a private cause of action in "interested persons" (any owner located within 1600' of the tent city) to sue for injunctive relief, including "reasonable expenses."
17 comments:
This law is already confusing me. So take the encampment in Bethlehem by the rail tracks, does this mean that Norfolk Southern has a legal responsibility to enforce the law for public safety to remove them, or face a potential injunction from a business nearby? Who is then legally responsible for the “crime” and cleanup cost, the homeless folks with no money? The law might be some legal mechanism that could be beneficial but it already seems that it might lead to odd legal consequences where one company is sued by a business owner for not forcing someone off their property soon enough? This feels like it doesn’t do anything because you’ll just further be shuffling homeless folks from one property to the next creating legal issues between various businesses and parties. Maybe I’m interpreting what Bernie wrote incorrectly but this feels like a fluff piece of legislation that doesn’t do much of anything but be a grand stand so Nick Lisa and others can act like they’ve done something in Hairrsburg when we don’t get a budget passed!
“Amazingly, this legislation is opposed by the Pa. Municipal League”
Yea, really shocking. An organization that represents third class cities run by democrats (like Harrisburg, Erie, Allentown and Bethlehem) taking a position against actually solving a problem.
What do you think the purpose of the League really is? Newsflash: it’s to give political cover to the idiotic policies of democrat politicians. And guess what? It’s likely funded by our tax dollars. So it’s just another democrat propaganda machine.
When will you learn (or finally admit) that democrat politicians and those who support them are not interested in solving problems, just holding on to their political power?
Democrats are not serious people.
Your cousin figured it out. There is still hope for you Bernie :)
Bohare to 1:37, in Bethlehem’s encampment, I doubt anyone could be considered an interested party bc it is pretty isolated from residences or businesses. You are being purposely confused
Ask those who work/volunteer at shelters. I'm one. The majority of homeless are homeless by choice. They're able to loaf, get stoned, and follow no rules. That's fine, until their right to be lay-abouts becomes problematic for property owners and those wishing to enjoy public spaces without stench and harassment. The political left practices suicidal empathy, which is always disguised as compassion. I don't live in Allentown, and I no longer visit for fear of personal safety. But I believe Allentown richly deserves its problems (e.g. Nat Hyman's frustration) because it chose to enable those problems.
How is this a Democrat issue?
What’s the solution, round people up and shoot them?
The truth is, some of these people prefer the vagrant life. Some do not.
Nobody has an answer so they support laws that are appealing but in fact do nothing.
I beg to differ. Republicans are the ones that continue to cause damage to underfunded individuals. TAX THE RICH!
I agree- most of them are only concerned about their name recognition/social media presence. We currently have a prime example running for Executive- unserious and incompetent.
If they wanted help, there are plenty of programs
The Allentown police used to tell me that a lot live that way by choice. The outdoor population declines in winter because relatives let them in for a few months, couch surfing or sleeping in garages.
I don’t think it’s the majority, quite a few are seriously mentally ill, but there is an element of choice.
Oh, come on! The present Democrat policies do not emphasize personal responsibility for one’s actions. They throw money at undeserving people and agencies. I believe, to ensnare new voters who then become dependent on their warped version of government.
How does this proposed law solve a problem? Will people who are homeless — for whatever reason — disappear?
Glad this guy took out Pat Browne. Time to repeal the NIZ.
9:01, The Bill is not aimed at eradicating homelessness and obviously does not solve that problem. The problem it does solve, if it becomes law, is the nuisance that homeless encampments present when they are next to homes and businesses.
It’s a democrat issue because democrat politicians are enabling it. Their policies normalize it and make it easier to be homeless, without requiring the homeless to do ANYTHING to solve their underlying issue.
This in turn draws more homeless to the areas that have such stupid policies in place. So places like Allentown aren’t just dealing with THEIR homeless problem, but the homeless people that are drawn in as well..
As an example, in a sane world non profits feeding the homeless would be required to (at a minimum) collect the names of the homeless, where they’re living, where they came from, etc, and report that information to the local, county, state and federal government. Then make the homeless agree to get the help they need for their underlying issue (mental health, addiction, etc.) BEFORE they are served. They get ONE meal and there are NO repeat customers allowed.
That way the homeless get the help they need, the nonprofits don’t get rich by only treating a symptom, and THE CITY IMPROVES.
It’s not rocket science, unless you’re a democrat politician.
Agree. It is tired. The main beneficiary is a barrier to progress in the city. Little has happed elsewhere in the city over the last 10 years.
Coleman is a strong leader and rising fast locally. He took out the approps chairman in the State Senate and our Republican Congressman, who rode Trump’s coattails, is missing in action. All Mackenzie does is take photo ops and give vague stances on important positions. He won’t face his constituents in a town hall setting either.
Post a Comment