Philly tries to ban feeding homeless people outdoors

[Panzersharkcat]

Several organizations that feed the homeless plan to defy it. Good on them. I hope they succeed. Link.

The announcement was made with little fanfare on Wednesday, Mayor Michael Nutter introduced a series of actions designed to encourage hungry Philadelphians, and those who feed the hungry outdoors, to move to indoor locations over the next year.

Since Wednesday, the leaders of several organizations that feed the hungry have angrily spoken out against it, publicly stating they plan to defy the regulation, that's set to take effect next month.

Mayor Nutter defended it, saying the new policy initiative is aimed at increasing the health, safety, dignity and support for those vulnerable individuals who now gain their daily and often less than daily sustenance from well-intentioned people distributing food on city streets.

"Too often, I’ve driven past Love Park or along the Ben Franklin Parkway and seen people lined up in front of a van, shivering in the cold and rain, huddled in the dark. And sometimes they’re lined up but no van or car ever appears," said Mayor Nutter during Wednesday's news conference.

But critics of the ban claim it has less to do with ensuring a healthy environment for the homeless and more to do with removing them from the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, Love Park and other city venues popular with visitors.

At a public hearing on the issue, held by the Philadelphia Department of Public Health on Thursday, Philadelphia City Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell argued against the ban.

"I think it is quite obvious that we have a new court building, hotel, and certainly the Barnes foundation which I support, coming in town and we're for them 1000 percent but we don't believe we should further victimize people who are already victims, victims of poverty, victims of problems, victims in so many ways and exacerbate the situation by making them feel even more like victims," said Blackwell.

In response to assertations by some that the city is taking action because of the Barnes Foundation, the reborn Ben Franklin Parkway and the Sister Cities Park, Mayor Nutter responded, "Let me be very clear on this point: this is not about people. This is about activity. It’s not about who is on the parkway but how it is used. My motivation is not to exclude people. Anyone can walk the Parkway, visit our fantastic cultural institutions or just sit on a bench and contemplate the day. Anyone and everyone."

The leaders of "Chosen 300 Ministries" and "We Feed the Homeless: Philly", two groups that distribute food to the needy along the Parkway, argue there isn't enough indoor space in the city to accomodate all of the people who need help each day.

Brian Jenkins, the Executive Dirctor of "Chosen 300 Ministries", echoed Councilwoman Blackwell's comments at Thursday's hearing saying it's not about a health issue, it's about getting homeless people off the parkway.

"The mayor stated clearly in his press conference the goal is to get them indoors, they are not a them, they are not a those, they are citizens of this community and just like anyone else has a right to eat in this park, our homeless citizens have a right to eat in this park," said Jenkins.

During a rally in Center City on Saturday, Craig Stroman, CEO and co-founder of "We Feed the Homeless Philly", told NBC10 Philadelphia, "We don't have refugees, these people are Americans, we don't believe the Mayor should be putting this out and we need to come together as churches, as civic organizations and as non-profit organizations to push back against this policy."

The ban goes into effect in mid-April. Violators will face two warnings and then a $150 fine.

Jenkins says that won't deter his organization. He told the city Health Department, "We would like to serve the city notice right now, we are not moving we are going to stay at 16th and Ben Franklin Parkway on Saturdays."

Stroman says his group isn't budging either. "We're going to keep helping people until someone kicks us off these streets," said Stroman.

[Eulogy]

Mayor Michael Nutter

The name couldn't be more appropriate. It's all about getting rid of those undesirables, and they erroneously think it won't ever backfire.

[madd0ct0r]

Simply banning it without providing any access to the mandated indoor area is a bit cuntish.

I doubt there's many charities that feed people outside instead of giving them shelter by choice.
There's probably also a good percentage of 'clients' who prefer eating outside. I know I do, and I'm just a construction guy.

[Haruko]

I know when I think about the problems in society, feeding the rapidly growing homeless tops the list. Bravo to our well fed mayor of Philadelphia. He reminds me of that brave, well-bathed mayor of New York who recently liberated Zuccotti Park from those filthy, filthy Occupy protestors. Now if only he would finally stop administrating over the filthiest subway system in the country.

[dragon]

Wouldn't freedom to assemble be an issue?
Stupid side question. Can you make a claim on any portion of the Constitution? Example in the preamble it says promote the general Welfare. Would you beable to sue on that?

[Broomstick]

The problem is that the mayor would likely argue the "general welfare" is "promoted" by banning feeding homeless people outdoors, that somehow being shuffled into a church basement or whatever, out of sight, is more "dignified" or something.

This sort of thing is usually prompted by two motives:
1) Get the homeless/poor/whatever out of sight
2) Make things difficult/uncomfortable enough that they unwanted will go elsewhere and be someone else's problem

[dragon]

The only way I would be even halfway satisified would be that there are adequate places for the homeless to get food. Granted that does nothing for homeless that won't go to such a place for whatever reason. Instead of trying to ban the symptom maybe they should work on the cause.

[Lagmonster]

I wouldn't actually have a problem with the mayor's proposition if he'd got it right. I'm willing to accept that the guy's probably not trying to be a cackling asshole and honestly wants to, as he said, get both the workers and the hungry out of the rain and cold and somewhere safe and warm, but he's making it hard not to think he's short-sighted and ignorant because he missed the best possible reason why unlicensed and unmonitored drive-by feedings aren't a great idea.

And that is that there is a fuck-lot to be said for being able to prepare and serve food in environments where you can monitor employee health and food safety. We license people who serve food by the sidewalk to crowds of people for a good damn reason, and that reason shouldn't go away just because the food is free or the people are starving. I believe that charity workers should get the funding they need to work in environments that meet basic workpalce safety conditions, which 'my unlicensed van on the side of the road' doesn't. And these kitchens should have monitoring that guarantees the food they give people has been verified as safe, and prepared in conditions that have been identified as sanitary (also paid for by the city, if need be, since it is a ridiculously cheap way to head off many health problems).