Camping ban vote delayed in Las Vegas
The Las Vegas City Council delayed a vote on a proposal to strengthen its camping ban in line with a recent Supreme Court decision, which mostly affects the homeless population that congregates and sleeps in public spaces.
Staff recommended postponing a possible vote until at least the next City Council meeting on Nov. 6, Councilman Brian Knudsen said at Wednesday’s meeting.
Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada spoke out against the proposal during a public comment session.
The City Council is weighing whether to make changes to a 2022 ordinance that prohibits sitting, lying or camping on a public right of way, including sidewalks. Such laws were reinforced by a U.S. Supreme Court decision this year, which ruled they were constitutional.
The justices overturned a lower court decision from 2018 that stated camping bans amounted to cruel and unusual punishment when shelter space was lacking.
Las Vegas and Henderson — which also has a camping ban — signed onto a “friend of the court” brief supporting Grants Pass, Oregon, where the case originated, and where fines for people found sleeping outdoors were in question.
Las Vegas’ proposal calls for possible misdemeanor arrests and minimum jail sentences of 10 days for people convicted of two misdemeanor offenses within a year. It would eliminate an enforcement provision that says persons can’t be penalized if there’s no public shelter space available.
“As an alternative to the jail term specified by this Subsection, a court may order a defendant to complete a rehabilitation program, specialty court program or other program of treatment designed to assist homeless persons,” the proposal says.
Before a citation is issued, the person would first be warned that they’re in violation of the ordinance and be directed to the Courtyard Homeless Resource Center, the city says.
Clark County introduced a draft of its own camping ban proposal on Tuesday. Commissioners could vote on the ban as early as Nov. 5.
Under that proposal, authorities would inform people they’re in violation of the ban and direct them to resources unless “no shelter space or services are available,” according to the draft. “If an individual refuses to cease to engage in the prohibited conduct or refuses to go to an available shelter, a citation or an arrest may be made pursuant to this chapter.”
Public spaces the county listed included trails, parks, underpasses, washes and tunnels.
‘Discriminatory in nature’
“This isn’t simply an ordinance to help clean sidewalks or guide unhoused individuals to services,” said Elizabeth Becker of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. She described the city’s proposal as “discriminatory in nature.”
The bans criminalize homelessness, trap homeless people in the legal system “simply for existing in public spaces,” and make it harder for them to obtain housing, she added.
ACLU attorney Tia Smith told the City Council that while the Supreme Court declared the bans did not violate the Eighth Amendment, it did not “declare that such ordinances are entirely permissible or constitutionally valid.”
Smith added: “The proposed ordinance raises due process and equal protection concerns by explicitly targeting people experiencing homelessness for engaging in life-sustaining activities.”
Smith said the ordinance could leave the city open to litigation.
“Law enforcement officers will be tasked with enforcing this ordinance on a case-by-case basis, leading to confusion and inconsistency,” Smith said.
“This adds unnecessary complexity to police work, increases the risk of wrongful arrests and opens the door to discriminatory enforcement.”
Contact Ricardo Torres-Cortez at rtorres@reviewjournal.com.