The proposed camping ordinance balances the rights and needs of unhoused individuals with those of other city residents who want to continue to enjoy the beauty and safety of public spaces here in Ashland. 

The ordinance assumes that the city will offer “alternative space and shelter to rest and sleep for persons who lack access to suitable temporary shelter due to either financial inability or the unavailability of free, viable options.” The city currently supports the OHRA shelter, the low-barrier shelter at 2200 Ashland St., and an overnight campsite. While not perfect, these spaces are, in my view, viable options for unhoused persons: they are city-designated sleeping places that provide minimal comfort, supervision and safety.

The ordinance targets the camping prohibition toward a subgroup, delineated as the “voluntarily homeless.” The ordinance implies that these individuals have been offered various shelter options provided by the city — but have refused those services. By refusing viable offers, the ordinance therefore defines this group as those who “choose to live homeless” — and as such they would be subject to the camping ban. This places the onus for continued and improved provision of adequate shelter alternatives on the city of Ashland, which is entirely appropriate.

To some, it may seem overly draconian to insist that even those who live on our streets follow some basic rules. Like everyone else, I wish nobody lived on the streets. But the housing and mental health crisis is not going away anytime soon. The rules in this proposed ordinance are minimal and fair: If you want a place to sleep or camp here in Ashland, you need to use a city shelter or designated space. You also need to be a respectful neighbor. If you can’t or won’t, there will be consequences. 

Laurie True

Ashland