Should City Council Regulate Public Feedings? - TribPapers
Civic

Should City Council Regulate Public Feedings?

Photo by Mihaly Koles.

Asheville – It seems to be a pattern. The newly-organized Asheville Free Press (AFP) publishes a rumor, and Asheville City Council spends time airing public comment about it before debunking it in politically correct, sanitized terms. This leaves reporters, in need of context, taking the clickbait and boosting the online anarchist tabloid’s search engine ranking.

This week, after preliminary formalities, the ever-articulate City Attorney Brad Branham spoke about an issue that had provoked several emails and phone calls to city leadership. Even so, Branham said no discussion about regulating food sharing or food distribution was on the council’s current agenda, and nothing was scheduled on that or any related topic for any future meeting.

The city had, he said, been researching how to allow groups to continue providing meals for the indigent in parks in a way that didn’t jeopardize public safety and sanitation. The city harbored no intention to criminalize the sharing of food on public property. Furthermore, the city would enact any pertinent ordinances only through a public process with an opportunity for community input.

To this, Councilwoman Kim Roney said, “in the absence of a civic conversation, we are seeing a community conversation.” In light of staffing shortages, she said the city should focus on its core functions and, “withdraw any future effort on this [distraction] whatsoever.”

Mayor Esther Manheimer countered that maintaining public parks was a core function of the city government. And, hearing neither motion nor second for Roney’s request, proceeded with the agenda.

Roney had said the email concerns about banning the public feedings started coming to her on January 6. The AFP, however, in an article headlined, “City Council Is Considering Restrictions against Sharing Food with Unhoused Neighbors,” indicated the hubbub followed comments made by Captain Michael Lamb of the Asheville Police Department at the January 11 city council meeting. On a PowerPoint slide entitled, “Homelessness Response: Safety and Solutions,” one bullet point read, “Looking at necessary changes to current ordinances related to certain activities such as leaving food in parks.” 

The article considered an official response from the city dated January 24 to be part of the problem. The press release stated what Branham would later say, adding, “The city is experiencing some tension between food distribution in the parks which in some cases leaves behind a great deal of trash, and impacts park users and the surrounding neighborhoods and businesses.  One option city staff is exploring is an ordinance that would establish a permit system for feeding large groups of people. Permits would be given freely and would help to ensure that health and safety standards are met, as well as maintaining the parks free from litter.  This idea is in the exploratory stage and has not been presented to council for policy consideration.”

Commentary from the dais was sanitized in political correctness. Although progressive, members of the council were trying to be the adults in the room when it was apparent one among them had made a mistake. To avoid shame and work together as a group, nobody pointed a finger at the person who had acted out-of-turn – except for those speaking during public comment, through their praise.

While the item was far from being on the agenda, many citizens answered the call from Amy Cantrell of BeLoved Asheville to speak against consideration of regulations; so many, the council waived the time limit for public comment. Instead of engaging in constructive dialogue, however, speakers complained as if city leaders were not concerned about rat-attracting litter and crime, but were being racist, classist snobs and intolerant of the misfortunate. Instead of talking about ways to make the public feedings safe and healthy, they slammed decision-makers for banning charitable food sharing and suggested the free permits would be too expensive or otherwise too difficult to obtain.

Asheville City Councilwomen appeared drowsy during an extended public comment period last week. Screenshot.

Common threads included references to the speakers’ affiliations with Sunrise Movement Asheville, praises for the AFP, kudos to Roney, insults for Manheimer and City Manager Debra Campbell and requests that they step down, questioning of council members’ progressive credentials, accusations of fascism, requests for free amenities for campers, disparaging remarks about law enforcement, and accusations of criminalizing food sharing. 

Several speakers referenced the draft ordinance, about which members of the general public tuning in remained clueless. When asked for clarification, Branham replied, “I’m afraid an actual ordinance on this does not exist.  As I stated during Tuesday’s city council meeting, this matter has only been in the early stages of research.  A draft which had not yet been edited was shared publicly, but this has absolutely no relation to what a future ordinance might look like.  It was merely demonstrating what other cities had done and used that language as a starting point for internal discussion and edits. This has been falsely placed in the public eye as being the language under consideration by the city council, which is absolutely not the case. Therefore, at this time, there is no such ordinance other than a version simply taken from a Florida ordinance which is unrevised.”

Consideration of the Florida ordinance was so preliminary, a copy was not available through the normal channels of the city’s website. 

Instead, a link was discovered, with no sourcing, on the AFP site, and it points to QR Code (Scan with Phone):

The document gives a brief overview of ordinances receiving pushback in Ft. Lauderdale and Orlando. The Orlando ordinance contained limits on feedings used as talking points by persons calling into Asheville’s city council meeting. The “leaked document” also mentioned ideas about the next steps for Asheville.

Scan with Phone

Following public comment, Councilwoman Sheneika Smith asked for time for rebuttal, since her name had been mentioned several times. She said she had, as reported, visited a food-sharing event at Aston Park to gather information. She further found the group distributing food was filling a void in services and doing “very honorable” work. Unfortunately, due to the leak, she had a “triggered, electrified” reception and felt critical bridges had been burned.

Manheimer followed, telling councilmembers there is a reason the city has a system for crafting ordinances that includes a time and place for community input. Councilmembers also have a system for questioning the actions of staff. In not so many words, she reminded councilmembers that legislation is a lot like making sausage, and, as solutions to complex problems are vetted, many will “crash and burn.”