Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Space Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City proposes ordinance limiting sitting/lying in commercial rights‑of‑way; council tables measure after heated public hearing
Summary
A proposed ordinance that would allow enforcement to remove people who sit or lie in designated commercial rights‑of‑way drew a lengthy public hearing, including objections from homeless‑service providers and residents. Council voted 6–1 to table the ordinance to allow more outreach.
Longmont City Council considered a proposed ordinance (draft: add section to Title 10) that would prohibit sitting, lying or occupying commercial rights‑of‑way in defined commercial districts during most hours, with exceptions for medical emergencies, permitted events, mobility devices and city‑furnished seating. The proposal grew out of business community requests that public sidewalks, planting strips and frontage areas be kept clear of people who establish temporary encampments or occupy those spaces in ways businesses said interfered with customers and maintenance.
How the ordinance would work Public safety staff said the draft ordinance would apply in mapped commercial corridors (Downtown, Main Street, Hofer Street, Seventeenth Avenue/201 Avenue corridor, Kimball/Pratt and others) between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. (with extended hours to 3 a.m. on weekends), and would require officers to advise an individual and ask them to move before any enforcement action. Penalized behavior would exclude exercising free‑speech rights, using city‑provided seating, emergency medical situations, and waiting at transit stops. The ordinance was modeled in part on an existing Colorado Springs code provision and designed as an education‑first tool that could lead to citations only if a person refused to comply.
Public hearing and responses Public comment stretched for more than an hour. Representatives of local homeless‑service providers — including the Hope Navigation Shelter and HOPE Homeless Outreach — and several residents who had been unhoused urged the council not to adopt the ordinance, arguing it would criminalize homelessness, displace vulnerable people into less visible locations, and exacerbate barriers to housing entry by generating citations and warrants. Several speakers asked for more inclusive outreach and for city staff to work with service providers before moving to new enforcement measures.
Business owners and other residents urged the council to give police a tool to respond to complaints about encampments and people occupying sidewalk frontage areas in commercial corridors; they said current practices leave businesses responsible for maintaining landscaping and dealing with repeated disturbances.
Council action After public testimony and council questions about outreach and enforcement processes, Councilor Popkin moved to table the ordinance to the second regular council meeting in August to allow staff, public safety and service providers to meet with community stakeholders and attempt to refine the proposal. The motion to table passed 6–1 (Councilor Christ opposed). Council emphasized that tabling was intended to allow more collaborative work with nonprofit outreach providers and business groups, not to bury the issue.
Next steps Staff and council asked that public safety and outreach partners convene to discuss how an ordinance could be structured to allow assistance and referrals to services while addressing business complaints; tabling delays any enforcement mechanism pending those discussions.
