In the years Gerald Montag has spent rescuing animals that live on the street, he’s also made friends with people who live on the street: older men and women, families with children and former military veterans like himself. People who are homeless need support from their elected government officials, he said, not laws that will criminalize them for sleeping in washes or public parks.
“What is new to me is a local government willing to pile on to the suffering, a city council whose solution to get the people off the street is to take the street away,” Montag said during the public comment period at Tuesday’s Tucson City Council meeting. He lamented that some of Tucson’s most vulnerable people have fewer and fewer places to go for shelter.
Some, but not all, members of the council agreed with the spirit of Montag’s concern when they voted to reject a proposed ordinance that would have banned camping in washes, but passed a measure that includes fines or jail time for standing in certain street medians.
Mayor Regina Romero and her fellow council members were not aligned on a package of changes to city code that would put Tucson further in step with a national push to punish people who are homeless. For some council members, the proposed new ordinance to ban camping in washes went too far.
“I think this is stepping over the line and criminalizing homelessness,” said Ward 3 Councilmember Kevin Dahl. “I am not going to vote for this.”
Tucson proposes new limits on camping in washes, standing in medians — with possible fines, jail
The Tucson City Council will vote Tuesday on whether to ban camping in washes, further limit sleeping in parks and minimize standing in traffic medians,… Keep reading
Dahl, along with Paul Cunningham of Ward 2 and Lane Santa Cruz of Ward 1, voted against the measure to punish people who are homeless and living in washes. Romero, Nikki Lee of Ward 4 and Karin Uhlich of Ward 6, voted in favor of the homelessness ban.
“This is not an easy decision to make,” Uhlich said. “Washes are designed to move floodwaters and what we are seeing oftentimes is when camps get swept through washes, culverts get blocked and it does create flooding issues.”
Councilmember Richard Fimbres, of Ward 5, attended the meeting via Zoom. City Attorney Mike Rankin said he didn’t hear Fimbres vote so the motion failed in a 3-3 impasse. Shortly thereafter, while weighing a separate issue, Fimbres’ voice was audible to the council. Cunningham asked if the encampments measure could be reconsidered to allow Fimbres to vote.
Rankin said any motion that fails can only be reconsidered at a future council meeting. The next meeting is April 8.
Even as the city continues to put resources into emergency shelters and transitional housing, the number of people who are homeless or struggling to access housing resources means some Tucsonans continue to sleep in desert washes, public parks and alleyways.
The community discussion follows a conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court’s split-decision in 2024, reversing past rulings restricting cities from banning unhoused people sleeping in public spaces. The federal ruling overturned a lower court’s decision stating that under the Eighth Amendment it is cruel and unusual to punish people for living outside when they have nowhere else to go in their home city with insufficient shelter space.
“I think the state of Arizona, the state legislature is not stepping up. I think the federal government is failing cities throughout this country on not finding answers and funding for what we really need to do, to be able to house the unhoused, and provide mental behavioral services and detox programs to our community,” Romero argued, while voting for local measures that would further criminalize people in Tucson who are homeless.
The homelessness encampment ordinance was one of three measures put forward by the city manager’s office to pre-empt potential residents’ claims through Proposition 312, a state-level initiative approved by voters in 2024. The effort includes allowing Arizonans to apply for a limited tax refund for documented expenses they incurred to address problems when people who are unhoused create a “public nuisance on the property owner’s” land.
The refund kicks in when a city or county declines to enforce existing laws or ordinances “prohibiting illegal camping, obstructing public thoroughfares, loitering, panhandling, public urination or defecation, public consumption of alcoholic beverages or possession or use of illegal substances” and a property owner can show proof of money they spent as a result.
Tucson has not yet received any claims under the initiative since it went into effect in January, but the city attorney argued the ordinances would clarify what activities the municipality was prohibiting, making it easier to enforce.
The median amendment, as proposed, would only allow people to use medians on roads where the speed limit is under 30 miles per hour. Violations could result in community service, fines up to $250 or imprisonment not to exceed 24 hours, or by both fines and imprisonment.
While the median restrictions passed Tuesday; a proposal to ban camping in parks was not voted on after the wash ordinance failed.
“I don’t like this at all, and I’ll tell you why. We don’t have anywhere for them to go,” Cunningham said of the more restrictive measures on encampments. “The second you say: you can’t stay in the wash, they are moving to alleys and they are moving into parks and that is what I don’t want. There is only so much space.”
“We have done an immense amount of work to provide services and it’s not enough,” Santa Cruz said. “Why are we going to create prohibitions when we are not also offering solutions? The real danger is every single day one of our unhoused neighbors has to be outside.”
Republish our articles for free, online or in print.
