No, Houston has not made it a crime to feed the homeless

And a libertarian leaning guy I follow wrote this in response:

Ticketed $2,000 for giving people food?

This is why I constantly preach about paying more attention to your local government. This is absurd. https://t.co/w5OKl3F6b1

— Jeff Charles, Colored Liberty Nerd🏴 (@jeffcharlesjr) July 24, 2023

This led to an argument where someone claimed that this was somehow Biden’s fault (it isn’t, except in the vaguest sense of “leadership,” maybe):

Wait...what?

What is a president supposed to do about local governments stopping people from feeding the homeless?

You realize stuff like this happened when Trump was in office too, right?

Do you understand how our system of government works? https://t.co/JCBoaQXDdU

— Jeff Charles, Colored Liberty Nerd🏴 (@jeffcharlesjr) July 24, 2023

But let’s back up a bit. Is it illegal to feed the homeless in blue Houston? I did a little digging and here’s what I am seeing, in Houston’s ordinances.

Recommended

Internal Polling Come Out? Senate Dems Are Lying Even Harder About Blame for the TSA Mess They've Created

Doug P.

First, in Sec. 20-252 it says:

It shall be unlawful for any organization or individual to sponsor or conduct a food service event on public or private property without the advance written consent of the public or private property owner or other individual with lawful control of the property.

So that says you just need written consent. But its even thinner than that. If you scroll to Sec. 20-251, you see it defines the terms of that ordinance. I won’t go over every term defined, but let’s start with this definition: 

Food service event means each instance in which charitable food services are provided to more than five individuals.

Thus the statute requires that you are giving to at least six persons at the event. Therefore, handing a random homeless guy a hot dog isn’t a problem. But handing out hot dog to more than five people, and you might have a problem. But it gets dumber than that. The same definitional statute says:

Charitable food services means providing food without charge, payment or other compensation to benefit those in need at an outdoor location not owned, leased or controlled by the individual or organization providing the food.

So, you could 1) take it indoors, or 2) just do it on property you own, rent or otherwise control. Now from a little reading it appears that basically the city refuses this permission on every public property except for a police station. But nothing stops these people from buying or renting a property and handing out food for free. What Houston bans is these kinds of events on other people’s property, including public property, without permission.

And it is worth noting that this is also not a rule specifically tied to a person being homeless. Anyone who thinks only homeless people take advantage of programs at churches and the like where free food is provided has no experience with that. I have helped such organizations and many of the people who get free food this way have homes, but are still poor.

Honestly, I don’t know why this organization feels so strongly that it has to go onto public property and do this sort of thing, except maybe for the publicity of crying that they are being oppressed.

So really, none of the initial statement is true.

Finally, I am faintly irritated with the term “unhoused.” Of course, the purpose of always coming up with new terms for old concepts appears to be nothing more than indicating group identity. It’s like saying “see? We are using the newest terms so you know I am one of you.” And it’s a pretty terrible term as such terms go.

In any case, the next time you see this claim being made, you can know it is a myth.