it is a thing. even a well meaning person might not cook meat long enough, or store hot food in an unsafe way
however, for giving out free food to people who have no reliable way to get food? the city would be better off watching for consequences rather than preventing distribution. ( they could even get creative and sponsor food handler certification classes for organizations like food not bombs. )
i do think this is part of freedom of assembly. government shouldn’t interfere with people interacting freely with each other in non commercial situations. especially in an area the local government has clearly abdicated
… the City would gamify these sorts of things, arguing in court that since the group applied for some sort of permit once, that proved it agreed it needed a permit (which would never be issued)
Even if they showed up in court, wouldn’t the officers have to prove that the people who accepted the food are actually homeless for the charges to stick? And how are you going to prove that?
Good!
Here’s a bit more background on the matter, from one of the linked articles:
Mayor Sylvester Turner took to social media to explain his position Friday: “The city is not opposed to groups feeding those who are homeless,” he wrote. “But doing it in front of the central library is discouraging families, children and others from using it. After people provide the food, they leave but those who are homeless camp around the library and stay.”
An ordinance banning feeding more than five people in need without permission of the property owner, even in a public space, was put in place by City Council in 2012 but largely had gone unenforced for over a decade…
At the time, Food Not Bombs… received permission from then-mayor Annise Parker to continue sharing meals outside the downtown library…
The city began issuing tickets after funding its own dinners at a police parking lot just outside the courthouse doors where the trials were scheduled. Houston has declared that the lot is the approved public site for any group that wants to give away meals.
In an emailed statement, a city spokesperson explained that the meal program Houston is funding at the police parking lot is designed to use food to attract people to a place where they can engage with an array of services “on a reoccurring basis.”
This issue seems to boil down to the location where FNB is providing food, and not the fact that homeless are being fed.
The distance involved is about 1/2 mile via bird, or about 16 blocks or so on foot.
Less than that via tunnel.
BTDT.
Sorry for the length of this screed, but I’m a bit tired of Houstonians being lumped in with the evil fascists that are running the state:
Whether acquittals, or not getting ticketed in the first place, I hope the likelihood of those occurring is not a function of who out of the homeless is being fed and in which neighborhoods.
Capitalism itself is in competition with Food Not Bombs. Without the example of people living on the street stuggling to survive, how can corporations hope to keep employees from shutting up and taking abuse in their underpaid, miserable jobs?
Pretty much. In Austin, the Salvation Army has its own breakfast/dinner cafeteria space, and people wait in line to enter. There’s also a spot across the highway called Angel House that serves lunch to the homeless, and you have to enter to eat.
Looks that way.
The city has an area near the courthouse set up to provide food and other services; FNB has been feeding people by the library. So, it looks like if FNB merely moved to the official area, there wouldn’t be an issue.
The Library [where FNB has been setting up] is on the nw side of downtown… the courthouse is on the nw side. Downtown Houston is roughly one square mile. I’ve done my share of walking around there; you can easily walk across downtown in less than 1/2 hour.
I still don’t understand the need for laws against feeding hungry people.
One would think that churches would make well-publicized efforts at feeding those in need, since that is supposed to be a mandate… Isn’t it?
