Councilmember Quetcy Lozada’s bill governing mobile service providers was amended during the regular Council session on Thursday. But to some, it doesn’t help the problem it’s meant to address.
By Denise Clay-Murray
You can always tell when we’re nearing the end of a session of Philadelphia City Council.
First of all, meetings start late. Despite Council President Kenyatta Johnson’s dedication to starting meetings promptly at 10 a.m., there were circumstances that led to last Thursday’s meeting starting closer to noon than 10. The Appropriations Committee had been working on mid-year transfer legislation with the Parker administration for most of the week, and the committee was supposed to convene at 9 a.m.
Unfortunately, that didn’t happen. It happened after 10 a.m. Thus, the lateness.
Secondly, the agendas themselves start getting thicker. For some reason, Council tends to act like a student who has been assigned a 25-page paper and decides not to work on it until two weeks before it’s due during its last few meetings before a break. A lot of stuff that has been on the table for months was finally passed on Thursday.
And thirdly, legislation that hasn’t been passed either because the legislation needs work, or there is serious opposition to it, tends to come up as Council wraps up for the year.
Councilmember Quetcy Lozada’s bill governing mobile service providers fits into that category. The legislation, which was introduced in September, would add another chapter to Title 10 of the city’s code’s Regulation of Individual Conduct and Activity section that would govern mobile units in Lozada’s district — read, Kensington — that do things like provide wound care and other medical help to folks who are homeless, battling drug dependency, or both.
It would also cover people who give out non-medical goods. I reached out to Lozada’s office to see if food trucks were included in the bill that requires these units to get licensed by the Health Department or another entity appointed by Mayor Cherelle Parker and perform non-medical services in an area for no longer than 45 minutes, but I haven’t heard back. Violations carry a $1,000 fine, and if you get more than three violations, you can’t get your license renewed. There will also be designated times and locations established if the bill is passed.
The bill was amended after Lozada held meetings with all sides of the issue of addiction — service providers, faith-based organizations, in Kensington over the last seven months, she said.
While the people in the community understand that drug dependency is a medical issue that involves real people, the fact that many of these people are sleeping, living and leaving messes on the streets of Kensington has to stop, Lozada said.
“My community deserves some relief,” she said. “We’ve tried to be as compassionate as possible. We can’t continue to allow people to live on our sidewalks. It’s not healthy for us or for our families. It’s not healthy for our businesses. It’s not healthy for our students. It’s not healthy for anybody.”
But while Lozada says she talked to stakeholders on all sides of the issue, people from the harm reduction community came to Council to say that even with amendments, the bill is still too restrictive to allow them to be effective.
Terri Lee Andrew, a self-described harm reductionist, street medic and person in recovery, said the bill reflected Lozada’s disdain for those helping the addicted, despite the good they do.
“This bill is a naked attempt to target and penalize harm reductionists like myself,” she said. “What does it say that the Councilwoman has spent her time and energy restricting mobile service providers rather than simply putting in more trash cans for public bathrooms in our district?”
Bev Piper is an organizer with the Pennsylvania chapter of the Positive Women’s Network, a group created for and by women with HIV. She was among the stakeholders who met with Lozada, and while she appreciates the changes made to the bill, Piper believes it’s still focused on the wrong thing.
“From my standpoint, this bill poses serious dangers because it prioritizes aesthetics, control and punishment over public health, safety and dignity, especially for people who use drugs and rely on mobile outreach for life saving services,” Piper said. “It treats people who use drugs as public threats, not people in need of care. It even uses phrases like “nuisance” and “criminal activity”, and it blames residential trauma on exposure to people who are receiving these services in order to stay alive.”
“This bill has been amended from a total ban, and I appreciate that,” Piper continued. “Thank you for working with me on that. But it still operates from framework of control and punishment, not health and humanity.”
To be honest, I see both sides here.
There are certain things that you shouldn’t have to deal with first thing in the morning, and one of those things is stuff that should be in red bags marked “medical waste” all over your front porch.
If that was my existence, I’d probably go to my City Council person and say, “Nah, man. This ain’t gonna work!” too. Especially since little kids are too curious to have used needles lying around. That’s an HIV or Hepatitis B infection waiting to happen.
But while Lozada makes a very valid point in saying that there should be some containment when it comes to treating people battling addiction, enforcing this law if passed — the amendment was passed by a 12-3 vote — is going to have its challenges…and they could come in the form of a civil liberties lawsuit the minute Parker gives a passed bill her signature.
The bill could come up for a vote as soon as Thursday’s Council meeting.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the article belong solely to the author, and not necessarily to the author’s employer, The Philadelphia Sunday SUN, the author’s organization, committee or other group or individual.
Leave a Comment