SALT LAKE CITY — David Ibarra looks out his window every day and sees people camping outside his business.
“People sleeping in tents, drug use on this side of the building over here,” the downtown businessman told FOX 13 News on Wednesday.
It’s why he’s one of nine plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Salt Lake City arguing that the city itself has created a “nuisance” by not enforcing anti-camping laws.
“They’ve got to find ways to solve this and get people the help they need, but also residents the safety that local government’s responsible to give. So it was an accountability suit on our part,” said Ibarra, who previously ran for Salt Lake City mayor in 2019.
On Wednesday, the Utah Supreme Court considered whether to revive the lawsuit that was rejected by a lower court judge earlier this year who cited the “public duty doctrine.” The law basically gives some cover to governments from harms caused by a third party if public officials are protecting the community as a whole – instead of an individual.
Those experiencing homelessness share below what's lost when camping bans are enforced:
The justices focused extensively on the public duty doctrine during Wednesday’s arguments. While taking pain to insist they are not calling people experiencing homelessness a “nuisance,” the lawyer for the plaintiffs argued that the city itself has created a nuisance not unlike a neighbor who plays basketball at midnight keeping everyone up.
“The city is the neighbor. Here, the city is the landowner,” Ilan Wurman told the justices. “And that’s why there are two distinguishable duties. There’s the duty to enforce codes, which is a public duty and the duty to maintain their land free of nuisance.”
But the justices questioned how far that can go. Associate Chief Justice said it’s one thing to tell your neighbor to get rid of a nuisance on their property and quite another to dictate it citywide.
“They at least need to tell the people ‘This isn’t acceptable, you can’t do this on my property,’” said Justice Diana Hagen. “Hasn’t the city done that by passing these ordinances?”
Wurman replied that his clients don’t think city leaders have done that.
In her own arguments, the attorney for Salt Lake City warned the Court that if the citizen plaintiffs got their way, the impact “would be disastrous for all levels of government in the state of Utah.” Katherine Nichols argued it would disrupt emergency responses and other government functions by insisting that an individual’s complaints took priority over much more pressing emergencies in a city.
“Living next to public land, living next to a park strip or median is not special,” Nichols told the Court.
The justices took the case under advisement with no timeline for a ruling. In a statement to FOX 13 News, Mayor Mendenhall’s Office said it appreciated the Utah Supreme Court’s attention to a “legally complex and nuanced issue.”
“We believe the lower Court’s acknowledgment of the humanity of the unsheltered community is the correct and most important distinction in this case, and are optimistic the Supreme Court will have the same perspective,” the mayor said through a spokesperson. “As we now await a decision, Salt Lake City will continue implementing additional resources and services for individuals experiencing homelessness with our partners at the local and state level.”
Salt Lake City has begun enforcing anti-camping laws under an agreement reached with Governor Spencer Cox — so long as there is shelter bed space available. Communities across the Wasatch Front are now required to have plans in place to shelter people when temperatures get 18 degrees or lower.
Ibarra told FOX 13 News that he believes Salt Lake City has made improvements lately, but there is more than can be done.
“This is fixable. But the first thing we have to do? Is enforce what’s already on the books,” he said.
Outside of the courtroom on Wednesday, people experiencing homelessness across Salt Lake City offered their own perspectives on the enforcement of camping bans – arguing that they fail to help people exit homelessness and create a host of other problems for those living on the streets.
Ozzy — a 41-year-old who asked to be identified only by the name he uses on the streets — told FOX 13 News that he’s been homeless for around three years and prefers to camp. The experience of being in a crowded shelter full of other people experiencing “inner turmoil” is “stressful,” he said. Instead, he spends each night “walking around hoping to find a spot that’s dark and secluded enough that you can get a few hours of sleep before somebody or the law decides to come and mess with you,” he said, standing next to a green suitcase stuffed with his sleeping bags and other personal belongings at Liberty Park.
The decision to camp comes with trade-offs. Ozzy said the enforcement of anti-camping bans (through cleanups commonly known as “abatements”) have led him to lose personally meaningful items that once belonged to his deceased parents and sister.
“I had one important item from each of my family members that I kept with me at all times,” he said. “And due to an abatement that, like I said, was pointless, I lost all that – and now I have nothing.”
Through police enforcement of camping rules, Ozzy has also racked up a number of tickets for so-called “lifestyle crimes,” like camping and trespassing, court records show. He says those tickets – along with multiple charges for drug possession and paraphernalia – have made it more difficult to exit homelessness.
“You end up having to spend days in jail,” he said. “It’s just… it’s such a hassle for something that is pointless.”
Salt Lake County voters recently rejected a bond proposal that sought to address, in part, this cycle of reincarceration. County estimates show about 70% of those booked into the jail each year are repeat offenders, and it’s thought that many are people experiencing homelessness.
While Ozzy thinks camping enforcement does more harm than good, he also recognizes the significant impacts encampments can have on businesses, neighbors and public spaces – especially when there’s drug use and violence.
“There is that aspect,” he said. “There is that piece of the whole that is rotten.”
At Taufer Park, Cosette Sudbury – who has been homeless for around five years and is currently staying at one of the shelters – said she felt camp abatements were unnecessary. She noted that many people experiencing homelessness try to clean up when they do camp in public spaces.
“I don’t know that the camps are that dirty that they need to have a crew come in and clean them up,” she argued. “We do clean up after ourselves. Look, the park is not a mess. You know, we clean it every day.”
Both Sudbury and Ozzy said they want to see fewer government resources spent on pushing the homeless around the city through camping abatements – something they say won’t solve homelessness – and more on helping people get into housing.
“Go to the homeless and say, ‘Hey, these are the paperwork for you to fill out,” Ozzy said. “‘And we can help you here. We can do this.’ You know?”
