Vote on Rochester camping ban could come Monday as local and national court action is considered

Randy Petersen, Post-Bulletin, Rochester, Minn.
·4 min read

Feb. 3—ROCHESTER — A Rochester City Council vote on a

proposed camping ban

will be sought Monday, Feb. 5.

A

proposed ordinance

would make camping on city property a potential misdemeanor, carrying a penalty of up to 90 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.

"The city would ideally utilize this enforcement tool sparingly, while recognizing the inherent dignity of all individuals, including those experiencing homelessness," Rochester City Attorney Michael Spindler-Krage wrote in a report to the City Council.

Rochester Police Chief Jim Franklin has repeatedly asked the council to enact a ban in an effort to better control camping in city parks and other public spaces. He has said charges would be considered as a last resort in cases where people refuse to seek other available services.

He said Rochester police officers helped clear 130 camps last year.

The proposed ban comes as a similar limitation in an Oregon city is expected to be

reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court

later this year.

The Grants Pass, Oregon, case is a challenge to a class-action lawsuit filed in 2018 by three people, who claimed city laws punished them for being homeless. Their attorneys pointed to the lack of available housing and shelter in the city, as well as the broad nature of the restrictions, which led to a federal appellate court ruling in favor of their clients.

The National Alliance to End Homelessness reports the Supreme Court hearing is expected to be held in April, with a decision possible in June or July.

The proposed Rochester ordinance points to shelter limits, adding that prosecution will not occur unless a person is informed of available services and police have confirmed shelter space is available.

Rochester has two nightly shelter options available for individuals experiencing homelessness: the Rochester Community Warming Center at 200 Fourth St. SE and Dorothy Day Hospitality House at 703 First St. SW. They offer fewer than 75 beds combined.

Olmsted County Housing Director Dave Dunn reported recently that an overflow shelter site established at the Salvation Army's social services center, 115 First Ave. NE, saw as many as 27 people on the coldest nights of January, when beds at the two primary shelters were full.

A mid-July count by Olmsted County's Housing Stability Team found 174 individuals facing homelessness without an option for shelter.

While noting the space challenge, the ordinance also points to public safety concerns connected to the establishment of camps by people without shelter.

"Historically, in Rochester and elsewhere, encampments have attracted and involved people experiencing significant addiction and mental health challenges, as well as individuals who seek to take advantage of those staying in encampments," the proposed ordinance states. "Among other problems, encampments tend to result in accumulation of garbage and human waste, which creates a health hazard and can contaminate the ground and water."

It also points to potential conflicts with other people wanting to use the public space.

"While many unhoused individuals are able to exist in a space that does not cause public disruption, it is also true that many encampments do create significant harms, for both the unhoused individuals as well as members of the public attempting to use the same spaces," the proposal states.

The ordinance outlines some limits to potential prosecution, requiring notice of violation before a person can be charged, and people are expected to be given up to 48 hours to seek available services or shelter. However, simply relocating to another restricted area will not spur the need for a second warning.

Three men represented by Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services have reportedly cited concern that their lack of housing puts them in jeopardy of being charged, due to limited options. The legal assistance agency has sent the city a draft of a potential lawsuit, with notice that it would be filed if the ban is approved.

The lawsuit would seek a court order to reverse the camping ban.

Council members met in closed session on Jan. 17 to discuss the potential litigation before considering the new ordinance.

During their regular meeting at 6 p.m. Monday in council chambers of the city-county Government Center, the council is slated to have an open discussion of the proposal, with a formal vote possible.

If the measure passes Monday, Spindler-Krage is recommending the ordinance be given an official first reading at the end of the meeting, making way for the second reading next month, which would be followed by enactment of the ban, if approved.