Newark City Council considers ordinance that would make it illegal to sleep or ‘camp’ on public property

Homeless people and others found sleeping on public benches, sidewalks, streets and alleyways – or in a doorway to a public or private property abutting a public sidewalk – could face criminal charges under an ordinance being considered by the Newark City Council Safety Committee.

A first offense of what the proposed ordinance calls “prohibited camping” would be considered a minor misdemeanor, and anyone found guilty could be sentenced to a fine of up to $150. 

Any subsequent violations – including a second or third time found sleeping on a bench or in a doorway – would be considered fourth-degree misdemeanors punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a fine of up to $250 for each offense.

The safety committee is scheduled to discuss the proposed ordinance during a meeting in city council chambers at 5:45 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 3, before the regularly scheduled council meeting at 7 p.m. The council and committees meet at Newark City Hall, 40 W. Main St.

Council member Bill Cost Jr., vice chair of the safety committee, said Friday he has concerns about the legislation.

“I understand why it’s a problem, but I’m of the opinion that this makes it look like we’re willing to just give up on people and let the police arrest them,” he said. “And I’m not sure that this is a good idea to put this additional burden on a police officer.”

Also, he said, it likely would make life more challenging for those who might end up being charged.

“They will come out of jail, and they will still be homeless – and have a record, which will make it even harder,” Cost said.

“I think we are bigger and better than that,” he said. “It will be up to the community to decide whether we are going to find the funds to provide some form of housing for these folks. The problem is not going to go away. 

Other members of the safety committee contacted Friday did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment on the proposed legislation.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision issued on June 28 allows cities to make it illegal to sleep or camp on public property, and that ruling gave a green light to cities across the country to approve such ordinances.

Advocates for homeless people in Newark and Licking County are not surprised by the proposal but are nonetheless incensed by what they see as criminalization of a human right to decent housing.

“This is inhumane treatment to our fellow citizens, especially when housing for low-income people is so scarce,” said Nancy Welu, a volunteer with the Newark Homeless Outreach who is encouraging housing advocates to attend the safety committee meeting on Tuesday.

“We have no housing, and we’re going to start putting people in jail because they have no housing? We have elderly people and young people. Do we have some who want to be out there, who choose to be out there? Yes, but it’s a very small minority.”

Welu said she has spoken with public officials, and “they just see the world through a different lens.”

“My glasses are not rose-colored; I see what’s right in front of me,” and what she sees, she said, is people who need help, not a criminal record for sleeping on a park bench.

“We might see fewer [unhoused people] if they’re in jail,” Welu said. “They will continue to dig out of the holes they’re already in. If they get a misdemeanor, they’ll be scrambling, trying to find new places to hide, and the city will use resources to find them.”

Newark has a limited number of shelter beds for homeless people, and it has no “low-barrier” shelter that will take in people who have pets or who might be dealing with substance-use disorder.

Welu said that when the Supreme Court decision was made, the Newark Homeless Outreach team told people that something like this could come to pass in Newark. 

“But quite frankly, the city of Newark has been doing this already,” Welu said. “Police have been giving people a heads up that an area is going to be cleared,” but she fears that police might not give warning if this ordinance passes. 

“These are real people with real lives and real problems,” she said. “They are not just trash on the streets.”

The proposed ordinance would make it illegal to “camp” on public property and describes a “campsite” as “any place where bedding, sleeping bag, or other material used for begging purposes, or any stove or fire is placed, established, or maintained for the purpose of maintaining a temporary place to live, whether or not such place incorporates the use of any tent, lean-to, shack or any other structure, or any vehicle or part thereof.”

It further says that “no person may sleep on public sidewalks, streets, or alleyways at any time as a matter of individual and public safety,” and that “no person may sleep in any pedestrian or vehicular entrance to public or private property abutting a public sidewalk.”

The City of Chillicothe, south of Columbus in Ross County, considered an ordinance similar to the one proposed for Newark. That was in 2022, and community outrage over the proposal was such that the city council backed away from the legislation. 

The June supreme court ruling allows cities to make it illegal to sleep or camp on public property. The case originated in Grants Pass, a city of about 38,000 people in southwestern Oregon – a city where about 600 people are homeless on any given day, and where the city was challenged in court for passing a law to make it illegal to camp or sleep on public property.

Advocates for homeless people filed a lawsuit against the city challenging the law and eventually lost that fight in the supreme court.

“Johnson v. Grants Pass is a court case originally filed in 2018 that determined it is cruel and unusual punishment to arrest or ticket people for sleeping outside when they have no other safe place to go,” says the National Homelessness Law Center on its website about the case. “The case started in Grants Pass, Oregon, when the city began issuing tickets to people sleeping in public, even when there were not enough safe, accessible shelter beds.

“Grants Pass, like many cities in America, is thousands of housing units short of what is needed,” says the law center, based in Washington, D.C., which defended homeless people in the supreme court case. “That shortfall will not be solved by putting more people in jail or issuing more tickets. The solution to homelessness is safe, decent, and affordable housing for everybody.”

Marcus Roth, communications and development director for the Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio, based in Columbus, said the ordinance proposed in Newark is the first the organization has heard of in the state since the Grants Pass decision in June.

“We were concerned that this was going to happen, and it’s alarming that we’re now seeing it,” Roth said. “The problem is that these bans don’t work, don’t work for the community, because you’re just pushing people from one place to another.

“It doesn’t solve the root problem,” he said. “It’s the lack of affordable housing – that’s the primary cause of homelessness.”

And he said such an ordinance will only make the problem worse, “because once they are fined, they have a criminal record and debt they can’t pay. It’s a huge barrier to getting a job and finding a landlord who will accept you. It increases costs for local governments – policing encampments, cleaning up encampments, the liability with what happens to people’s belongings, jail population increases, court costs for prosecuting people for the crime of poverty.”

Roth said that “criminalization can be tempting for politicians who want to look like they are solving the problem of homelessness.

“A better approach to homelessness – and we don’t advocate homeless encampments; there’s a better solution, a better solution than arresting people: It’s housing. A housing-first approach, which involves – especially for people with disabilities – permanent supportive housing with the things that people who have been living outside need.”

That solution can be expensive, he said, “but so is this criminalization approach. We might as well take the approach that is more humane, more effective and more long-term.

“Unfortunately, this (supreme court) ruling comes at a time when we are seeing visible homelessness increasing,” Roth said. “It’s becoming a more visible problem, and the pressure for politicians to do something is increasing. But lack of affordable housing is why it’s happening.”

Jack Shuler and Alan Miller write for TheReportingProject.org, the nonprofit news organization of Denison University’s Journalism program, which is supported by generous donations from readers. Sign up for The Reporting Project newsletter here.