Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Anti Camping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents, service providers urge council not to criminalize camping as anti‑camping ordinance is rescheduled
Summary
Multiple speakers at public participation urged the Lawrence City Council to delay or reject a proposed anti‑camping ordinance until the city identifies shelter and services; a planned public hearing has been rescheduled to Nov. 6, 2025.
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Anti Camping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several residents and local service providers told the Lawrence City Council on Tuesday that a proposed anti‑camping ordinance risks criminalizing people experiencing homelessness unless the city first identifies housing and services for them.
Public commenters asked the council to delay the ordinance and to develop a coordinated plan for shelter, outreach and winter protections before clearing encampments.
The comments came during the meeting’s public participation period. Rosa Valerio, who gave her address as 11 Lawrence Street, said she had a series of questions about the proposed ordinance (item referenced on the agenda as 55124) and asked, “Where will people go when encampments are cleared, and how will they be protected with dignity and safety for our most vulnerable residents as winter approaches?”
Anna Javier, 250 Merrimack Street, said the ordinance has been on the agenda for about a year and that a public hearing originally scheduled for last month was rescheduled for today and then rescheduled again to Nov. 6, 2025. “Cold weather is not just uncomfortable, it is also dangerous,” Javier told the council. She said passing a ban without arranging places for people to go would “simply move it out of sight” and risk pushing people into the criminal legal system.
Julio Mera, of the Merrimack Valley Dream Center, and Natasha Alba (36 Lawrence Street) echoed those concerns, saying anti‑camping laws in other cities have not reduced homelessness and instead scatter people, making outreach harder. Mera urged the council to invest in support services rather than enforcement, and Alba said homelessness should be approached as a public‑health and housing challenge rather than a crime.
Councilors and staff reiterated that the matter remains under the council’s review and that the public hearing has been rescheduled to Nov. 6, 2025. Commenters asked the council to ensure that any ordinance is paired with concrete shelter plans and service agreements before enforcement begins.
The meeting record shows no vote on the ordinance itself during this session; public comment and scheduling issues dominated the discussion.
The council accepted the public comments and proceeded with the rest of its agenda.
Ending: The ordinance remains under consideration. The public hearing is now scheduled for Nov. 6, 2025; councilors and commenters said the city should use the interval to finalize where people will be placed, what services will be provided, and what winter protocols will be in effect.

