The Palmer City Council will begin imposing fines on those who illegally camp in parks and other public properties within the city.
After hearing impassioned testimony at the Oct. 28 meeting from both sides of the issue, the council voted 4-1 to approve the ordinance. Deputy Mayor John Alcantra was the lone “no” vote.
A number of residents and business owners urged the council to pass the ordinance, claiming that illegal encampments and vagrancy were on the rise, causing people to feel unsafe in public spaces.
In the days and weeks leading up to the vote the ACLU of Alaska used social media to encourage opposition to the ordinance, claiming it was inhumane to stop people from sleeping and camping on public property.
Alcantra was adamantly opposed to the ordinance, characterizing it as “a cruel and unusual hammer.” He claimed fining people for illegal encampments would only force them to go somewhere else.
“I just can’t agree with it,” he said.
The other council members, including newly elected Mayor Jim Cooper disagreed and overwhelmingly passed the measure.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
According to the ordinance, it aims to protect public safety and legal access to city facilities, while preserving the intended uses of these community spaces. It also allows the city to impose fines and remove personal property for unauthorized camping or sleeping with shelters, tarps or bedding on public property. This includes parks, streets, rights-of-way, public buildings, greenbelts and other municipal lands.
A second ordinance (25-006) seeks to prohibit sleeping on sidewalks, streets, alleys or within doorways. The council voted 4-1 to return the ordinance back to the city attorney to improve its clarity. Member Alison Collins was the only “no” vote.
While a vote on the sleeping ordinance was temporarily postponed, it appears to have the backing of most council members.
14 Comments
“……..fining people for illegal encampments would only force them to go somewhere else………”
Hello? This philosopher came up with this realization all by himself? Shouldn’t it be obvious that the purpose of the ordinance is precisely that the city wants them to go to appropriate places instead of littering inappropriate places? Maybe Mr. Alcantra’s problem is that the city has not yet created a free campground with free water, sewer, snow removal, no limit on the number of days, and without littering rules? Is it the city’s responsibility to do so? I can’t even legally camp over 14 days in the same spot out in the middle of the Nelchina Basin on unclassified federal, state, or borough lands, and I certainly can’t create a litter dump out there. Is Mr. Alcantra familiar with the concept of basic human responsibility? If so, what is his answer for people who REFUSE to live in society under the concept of law?
That “Philosophers” point is that it just results in homeless going from parking lot to parking lot; they’re still a problem. All you have to do is look at the moron Mayor of Anchorage to see that play out. He’s not wrong even if the answer isn’t to just let them stay on public property.
Also yes, if the city passes an ordinance then it is their responsibility to have a viable plan B for all those people. Again, see the idiot in Anchorage for a prime example of this not being the case and repercussions.
It’s amazing that two things can be true at once: homelessness shouldn’t be given free reign of public property and glorified as a lifestyle, and cities need actual places to put them if they want to pass these ordinances, otherwise the ordinances are stupid. Again. See Anchorage.
“………Also yes, if the city passes an ordinance then it is their responsibility to have a viable plan B for all those people………..”
So the City of Palmer has to build “a free campground with free water, sewer, snow removal, garbage service, no limit on the number of days, and without littering rules”? Then Wasilla has to do so? Then Houston? Talkeetna? Anchorage? Seward? Valdez? Sitka? Ketchikan? Et al?
Did you really think about it before you pronounced the solution to all this?
Kmay, he most definitely IS wrong. You’d spill a lot of ink attempting to defend your “viable plan B” claim, and you’d still fail. That mindset is exactly what caused the problem in the first place, the idea that the public at large is somehow automatically responsible for anyone and everyone who ends up or chooses to be homeless. It is, in fact, the responsibility of the city to run anyone off public property who doesn’t belong there. I don’t know what the best solution is, but it most certainly is NOT entitlement.
You sprinted right at missing the point, didn’t you. The point is *where are they going to go when you move them from public property A, when there’s nowhere but public property B for them to go to*. Are you telling me you seriously want PPD and AST or whoever to literally just chase homeless people around because those people have nowhere to go to? That is literally what Anchorage is doing, you donkey. They’re chasing these homeless people from park to park and wood to wood behind apartments because they have nowhere for them to go to. It’s a toothless ordinance. Unless you’re just planning to push them from Palmer to Wasilla to take up public areas here? Holy crud use your head. **you need somewhere to chase them off to that keeps them out of public areas for good**.
What are the public camping options in Palmer? That are considered legal. Anyone know?
cheerleading the further punishment of homeless people. More “courageous” reporting from Joel. And I mean that — he is risking his immortal soul with this kind of viciousness.
Go to hell cooper
“The Palmer City Council will begin imposing fines”……on homeless people. think a moment please.
Yeah, almost a joke. They have no money. Just troubles. For everybody. Just send in the cleanup crew, bill the state (so EVERYBODY) shares the pain of yet more resources being doped away), and force them to move to Camp B.
Repeat as necessary with a move back to Camp A.
We can debate full lavatory facilities in these camps, including toilets, showers, free water, hot water, laundry machines, garbage pickup, wifi, and a blind eyes as dope gets delivered.
Telling us you do not know Scripture without telling us directly that you do not read the Bible.
That’s for you cooper.
Reggie, I didn’t propose a solution. You did more of that than I did in your own comment. I pointed out an obvious flaw that makes this a toothless ordinance. Yeah. It’s up to the city to figure out something so that they don’t just play leapfrog with these homeless people chasing them from public spot to public spot. It’s not my job to figure out what exactly that is. But I know how to use my noggin’ and notice an obvious flaw in this ordinance that I’ve yet to see a solution for. If there is one already in place, which would be genuinely fantastic, I’d love to hear it.
Every town & city has offices for employment, food, transportation and housing assistance. That is the END of the public & private sector’s moral obligation & responsibility to the indigent recidivist “homeless”