COLORADO SPRINGS- It’s official! Colorado Springs City Council last night renounced our city’s long-reputed (and disputed) Christian Values. In yesterday’s session, an ordinance was approved to prohibit the homeless from seeking refuge on public land. Some might see this is a step forward for the pious headquarters of America’s military religious empire, a self-suicide bomb to its pseudo-spiritual center.

The council on Tuesday listened to hours of public input, predominantly against adopting the ordinance for a panoply of reasons. The speakers thanked the councilors for their patience. More than a couple reminded them of Jesus’ words, what you do for the least of my brethren, etc. The nefarious Doug Bruce weighed in against the ordinance, not out of sympathy for the “bums” but because he thought the legalese too vague. Many speakers for the homeless agencies asked the city for more time, to delay a decision for further study. They sensed perhaps that passage of the ordinance was eminent, but ultimately gave the council its cue.

Between doing nothing and doing something, eight out of the nine councilors expressed that they had to do something, which meant the ban. Police Chief Meyers had presented no other options for consideration. In his presentation the day before, the alternatives listed were “none.”

And whether they intended it or not, a number of local advocacy groups put their name to the chief’s report. He made clear that not all of the organizations favored the camping prohibition, but more cleverly, he summarized their input as having concluded their were no other options. Included as hapless “signatories” were the PPJPC and the local ACLU. I’m not sure how several meetings about the homeless issue, led by the PPJPC, could have yielded no other options but a ban, but that was how the police chief summarized it.

The only refutations offered were testimonials to the potential efficacy of third party faith-based agencies to help the homeless, and pleas for more time. There was little discussion about what else the city might do.

Of course there is an important alternative the city can consider. More services. If the homeless present a health, sanitation, security and humanitarian problem, resolve it with better services.

I was making the point earlier about private and public property. Public land is the public’s private property. The city has just as much responsibility to provide services to the public lands and it does to the private. More so, actually. What the city has done in this case is withhold sufficient services and blamed the problem on the homeless. Is there a mess? Clean it. Is there lawlessness, police it? A fire risk? Monitor it. People living in need? Give.

The city council members assumed to help the poor with this ban, intent to lift them from their squalor. How patronizing.

Imagine if the city was to withhold services from private property. Imagine if private homes lo longer received sewer and water, garbage pickup and police oversight. Our residential areas would quickly be swallowed by tremendous squalor. Imagine telling private property owners to pick themselves up from their mess.