Connecticut is one step closer to ensuring homelessness isn’t criminalized.
A bill providing residents the right to sleep and eat on public property was recently approved by the state’s Housing Committee.
The bill wouldn’t allow unhoused people to make their own shelters, according to Housing Committee Co-chair State Rep. Antonio Felipe, a Democrat from Bridgeport.
“It's important to note that it's seeking shelter, not creating shelter,” Felipe said. “This does not mean you can create an encampment. It does not mean that you can create some structure of your own. You are seeking shelter that already exists.”
Along with preventing homeless encampments from forming, the bill would prohibit unhoused people from sleeping on school property, Felipe said.
The bill is a response to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year, allowing communities to pass laws prohibiting sleeping outdoors. Housing advocates say the decision effectively made homelessness illegal.
More than 50 people, who are for and against the bill, spoke before state lawmakers.
The bill would have a detrimental effect on the state’s public transportation, Connecticut Department of Transportation Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto said.
“Allowing homeless individuals to perform life‐sustaining activities near or on these areas — such as resting, sleeping, or storing personal belongings — creates conditions that can lead to crashes, injuries, or fatalities,” Ecualitto said.
The bill is a matter of life and death for some housing advocates, like Sarah Fox, chief executive officer of Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness.
“Cities and towns need tools to work with their communities to minimize disruptions while also upholding the dignity and rights of every person,” Fox said. “This bill does not take those tools away — it simply ensures that no one is punished for lacking a home when no adequate alternatives exist.”
The bill is next up for a vote by the full General Assembly, where State Rep. Tony Scott, a Republican representing Monroe, Easton and Trumbull, hopes some of the language is clarified around what constitutes available public property.
Despite his concerns, Scott voted in favor of the bill in committee.
“I’m looking forward to see if this bill gets to the floor, and how we can see we can make it work, to be able to work for all parties, and make sure that again, just because you're homeless, you're not getting a ticket for being homeless. You're already in a bad state at that point,” Scott said.
