MANCHESTER, NH – Prior to Tuesday night’s Board of Mayor and Aldermen (BMA) meeting, advocates for greater housing affordability rallied outside of City Hall.
The rally came after an effort last month that would have modified City Ordinance Chapter 130.13 to allow police officers to issue citations for camping on public property if no shelter beds are available. Currently camping on public property is illegal in most circumstances under city ordinance, with fines only given when shelter beds are available.
After a committee hearing about the ordinance proposal on July 31, the suggested amendment to 130.13 was tabled, but people attending the rally were still displeased that the proposal was not received and filed, or killed in BMA parlance. There was also frustration over the lack of progress on rising housing costs across the city.
“The rent is too damn high,” said Brandon Lemay. “I wish the city could be more focused on helping those that need help rather than criminalizing the unsheltered at even further expense to the taxpayer.”
Alderman At-Large Joseph Kelly Levasseur, the architect of the proposed ordinance change, disagreed with Lemay’s sentiments over the proposal.
“Mr. Lemay’s sophomoric use of the 8th Amendment doesn’t hold water. Keeping public spaces free and clear from campers is not “cruel and unusual punishment” when they can be removed from these places when beds are available,” said Levasseur. “Simply put, the city ordinance is in direct conflict with the state statute. Manchester needs to remove this entitlement of being allowed to camp on public property when beds are not available, to be in sync with the state ordinance. Manchester does not owe every person seeking shelter a bed. This ordinance actually creates litigation and is holding the city hostage while at the same time handcuffing our police, who are simply trying to do their jobs of moving vagrants along.”
Lemay was one of many individuals speaking during the BMA meeting’s public comment session, stating that homelessness is not a moral failing but a result of stagnant incomes and rising housing costs. Another individual frustrated with the city’s lack of progress in addressing the twin issues of homelessness and housing affordability who spoke during public comment was Bree Whalon.
Afflicted with multiple sclerosis, Whalon cannot make more money than she does now or risk losing Social Security benefits even though she says it is difficult for her to work at all, at times. She is currently homeless and says she would need approximately four times what she makes now to afford an average rent in Manchester.
“I have no reason on paper to be homeless other than my income. I’m disabled, I can’t work my ass off, but I have no criminal record, no negative history with any landlord,” she said. “Everything is overpriced and overtaxed and the cost of things just keeps on going up.”
Others who spoke expressed similar concern that the city was not doing enough to support the city’s homeless population, but instead penalizing them for the fact that they are homeless.
While many people who spoke during the meeting – which became nearly two hours of public comment – supported the city government doing more to address the issue through various initiatives as well as supporting $150,000 to help draft a new bicycle master plan, not everyone who spoke felt that increased government would solve the problem.
Patrick Cain did not speak during public comment but afterward shared that he agreed with those demanding that the BMA refocus on addressing lowering property taxes and helping the city’s homeless population without more government intervention, which they felt would not solve the problem and only create more waste.
While Cain said he does support more public housing, he believes that it should be done at a state or national level with significant input from the business community.
“This can’t be just a Manchester issue – it’s just too big – but the worst thing you can do is create more bureaucracy,” he said. “The government does not have a good track record dealing with this type of problem.”
Near the end of the meeting, the board revived Levasseur’s proposal long enough to discuss whether Levasseur’s proposal would improve the current situation. Alderman Will Stewart called the proposal a “smokescreen,” and called on the board to work toward “real solutions” to the issue of homelessness.
In the end, the board voted in favor of “receiving and filing” the ordinance proposal, which for now means that it is no longer viable. The vote was 9 to 5 with Levasseur, Ed Sapienza, Bill Barry, Pat Long and Crissy Kantor voting against.
