Homeless feeders banned from Pa. courthouse lot
HARRISBURG — Groups that volunteer to feed homeless people in Pennsylvania's state capital are being banned from lots near the county courthouse and administration building because of complaints about public urination, defecation and other problems.
Dauphin County officials have told the volunteers to move on, Pennlive.com reported on Sunday.
Deputy Chief Clerk Scott Burford said Citizens Bank, which rents space from the county, has complained about its ATM kiosk being turned into a “Port-A-John” and said bank workers have been harassed and heckled by homeless people.
“We have a duty to react,” said Burford, who denied claims by some homeless advocates that the ban is meant to prompt arrests of homeless people.
Liesa Burwell-Perry, who directs outreach ministries for Glad Tidings Assembly of God, said the church has been serving food to the homeless behind the county building for three years. She said it's well-lit, centrally located and that the problems encountered at the county lot aren't likely to change if the charities are forced to set up shop in other locations.
“They're kind of entrapping us because they don't have a solution, and we don't know what to do,” Burwell-Perry said.
Burford said the county isn't looking to lock up or entrap the homeless and said the “no loitering” signs being posted won't just target the homeless. The signs are meant to deter patrons of nearby bars who park in the lots or stop there to relieve themselves before heading home.
“I don't know that arrests are a good solution for us. We've asked for the least invasive measures, and that's asking them to move on,” Burford said. “We don't want to see anybody put in jail.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.