Florida priest cited for feeding homeless wants his day in court

[aGameOfThrones]

The Rev. Canon Mark H. Sims (wearing a stole), rector of St. Mary Magdalene Episcopal Church in Coral Springs, is issued with a criminal citation for feeding the homeless.

[Episcopal News Service] A Florida priest who was issued a criminal citation for feeding homeless residents in a local park is fighting back.

“I am suing the city of Fort Lauderdale for the right to continue to feed the homeless on city streets,” according to the Rev. Canon Mark H. Sims, rector of St. Mary Magdalene Episcopal Church in Coral Springs.

Sims told the Episcopal News Service Nov. 13 that he has hired local attorneys Bill Scherer, a well-known trial lawyer, and Bruce Rogow, a constitutional lawyer who teaches at Nova Southeastern University, to defend him “in court against a criminal citation I was issued.

“I want to fight the constitutionality of the ordinance that was passed. As someone issued a citation I have standing and I’m going to use that opportunity.”

Scherer told the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel that the city ordinance, passed Oct. 31, which bans feeding of homeless in public places, is unconstitutional and discriminatory.



Local law enforcement officials halted Sims and two others from feeding homeless residents in Stranahan Park on Nov. 2. Sims, 57, said he was detained by police, fingerprinted, issued the citation and released. He is awaiting a court appearance date and faces a $500 fine and a possible 60 days in jail.

“If I get sentenced to jail, I’m going to jail,” Sims said. “But, I’m willing to stay there [in jail] for the right to compassionately feed people who are living on the street,” he added.

City officials have said they want feeding programs moved indoors but Sims and others say there are simply not enough locations to accommodate growing numbers of homeless families and individuals.

“I am determined to allow people to be able to compassionately feed the homeless and people who are hungry on the streets of Florida. I don’t see how we can pass an ordinance that restricts human decency,” added Sims, who has created a legal defense fund on “gofundme.com” and expects “a tough challenge in court.”

He vowed to continue to feed homeless people and on Nov. 12 joined others doing just that at a local beach.

“The Episcopal Church in this diocese feeds people every single day through one of several agencies,” Sims said. “We have on-site places that we use and there are so many social service agencies we have created in Southeastern Florida to help families and individuals as much as we can, but there are still not enough.”

As chair of the board of the Episcopal Charities of Southeastern Florida “we just funded for a two-year cycle $600,000 worth of grants to parishes with at least half of that going to programs that are caring for the feeding of hungry people, homeless people and the elderly,” Sims said.

Typically, during winter months families and individuals who are homeless migrate to Florida from colder climates, so there has been a noticeable uptick in their numbers locally, he said.

On Sunday, Nov. 9, members of his parish returned to the park and served a hot meal of sautéed chicken, rice, vegetables and dessert and distributed “takeout bags of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and apples. We saw more women than we normally see. It was a bit surprising and a bit sad,” Sims said.

But he added that “the city wants them off the streets. They don’t want to do anything to encourage them to be able to stay on the streets. The problem is, there’s no place else to go. They want to make it someone else’s problem.”

Feeding people who are homeless is nothing new for Sims, who said “this has been going on since I was in seminary in 1999 and before that when I was a parishioner in South Florida. I’ve been doing this for 20 years.”

His goal, he said, is for city officials to rescind the ordinance “and I want to sit down with a clean slate and help rework it.”

Meanwhile, local, national and international church communities have rallied in support of Sims, according to the Rev. Canon Donna Dambrot, Episcopal Charities executive director. She compared his legal struggle to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s nonviolent resistance to unjust laws.



http://episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/ens/2014/11/14/florida-priest-cited-for-feeding-homeless-wants-his-day-in-court/

[oyarde]

I hope Sims defeats the city ordinance and does not go to jail .Coral Springs must be a shithole .

[phill4paul]

He should feed them on the court house steps.

[Acala]

I hope Sims defeats the city ordinance and does not go to jail .Coral Springs must be a shithole .

Please note, the Church (and probably most of its members) are in Coral Springs. The feeding is taking place in Ft. Lauderdale, many miles away. So, as is typical, these people are not doing the feeding on their own property, or even in their own community. They are commuting to another community and doing the feeding there and then going home, leaving any problems caused by the feeding behind for the people in Ft. Lauderdale to deal with. My point is simply that these matters are often more complicated than they appear to be.

[oyarde]

Please note, the Church (and probably most of its members) are in Coral Springs. The feeding is taking place in Ft. Lauderdale, many miles away. So, as is typical, these people are not doing the feeding on their own property, or even in their own community. They are commuting to another community and doing the feeding there and then going home, leaving any problems caused by the feeding behind for the people in Ft. Lauderdale to deal with. My point is simply that these matters are often more complicated than they appear to be. I agree they are complicated . This guy does not need to go to jail for it though .

[jbauer]

So are you saying that the priest should be in trouble for giving gifts to other human beings because he's not doing it in his own town?


Please note, the Church (and probably most of its members) are in Coral Springs. The feeding is taking place in Ft. Lauderdale, many miles away. So, as is typical, these people are not doing the feeding on their own property, or even in their own community. They are commuting to another community and doing the feeding there and then going home, leaving any problems caused by the feeding behind for the people in Ft. Lauderdale to deal with. My point is simply that these matters are often more complicated than they appear to be.

[Christian Liberty]

"You tacitly consent to these types of laws by choosing to live in said community. If you don't like it, leave."

OK... there's no way I can leave that by itself without a statement that I am in fact being facecious, but this is ultimately where any "tacit consent" arguments for government lead.

[Acala]

So are you saying that the priest should be in trouble for giving gifts to other human beings because he's not doing it in his own town?

Nope. I am saying that what leads to ordinances like this is unhappy business owners and neighbors. Whether right or wrong, they associate the homeless with crime, litter, public intoxication, and filth. Feeding operations attract and concentrate the homeless in particular neighborhoods and parks. People don't like having the homeless concentrated in their neighborhoods and the parks where their children play. The people who are doing the feeding are usually (as in this case) doing the feeding in someone else's neighborhood rather than their own so the problems associated with concentrated populations of the indigent are visited upon people other than those doing the feeding. I don't think it is unreasonable for people to say "Look, you want to feed the homeless? Great. Do it in YOUR neighborhood in the park where YOUR kids play - not ours."

Ultimately, as is so often the case, it is a problem associated with public property and the inevitable conflicts that result from forced sharing of resources.

[Christian Liberty]

Nope. I am saying that what leads to ordinances like this is unhappy business owners and neighbors. Whether right or wrong, they associate the homeless with crime, litter, public intoxication, and filth. Feeding operations attract and concentrate the homeless in particular neighborhoods and parks. People don't like having the homeless concentrated in their neighborhoods and the parks where their children play. The people who are doing the feeding are usually (as in this case) doing the feeding in someone else's neighborhood rather than their own so the problems associated with concentrated populations of the indigent are visited upon people other than those doing the feeding. I don't think it is unreasonable for people to say "Look, you want to feed the homeless? Great. Do it in YOUR neighborhood in the park where YOUR kids play - not ours."

Ultimately, as is so often the case, it is a problem associated with public property and the inevitable conflicts that result from forced sharing of resources.

It might not be unreasonable for people to say that. But it is UTTERLY unreasonable for them to show their distaste for it by involving government violence. Therein lies the problem, boobus americanus does not realize that government involvement is inherently violent. If some private citizen decided to pull a gun to drive the homeless people away, not one sane person would support them, ever. There are times when people here will support individual action, but never for something as peaceful as this.

[jbauer]

So you think we should card people who are sharing their wealth with others voluntarily to confirm they are only sharing it with people who have a common geographical relationship with one another? And if broken we should use government violence and/or a cage to stop said person from sharing their wealth freely?

How are we ever going to move past government handouts if we don't allow private organizations to hand things out without fear of entrapment


Nope. I am saying that what leads to ordinances like this is unhappy business owners and neighbors. Whether right or wrong, they associate the homeless with crime, litter, public intoxication, and filth. Feeding operations attract and concentrate the homeless in particular neighborhoods and parks. People don't like having the homeless concentrated in their neighborhoods and the parks where their children play. The people who are doing the feeding are usually (as in this case) doing the feeding in someone else's neighborhood rather than their own so the problems associated with concentrated populations of the indigent are visited upon people other than those doing the feeding. I don't think it is unreasonable for people to say "Look, you want to feed the homeless? Great. Do it in YOUR neighborhood in the park where YOUR kids play - not ours."

Ultimately, as is so often the case, it is a problem associated with public property and the inevitable conflicts that result from forced sharing of resources.

[Acala]

So you think we should card people who are sharing their wealth with others voluntarily to confirm they are only sharing it with people who have a common geographical relationship with one another? And if broken we should use government violence and/or a cage to stop said person from sharing their wealth freely?

How are we ever going to move past government handouts if we don't allow private organizations to hand things out without fear of entrapment

My solution is to eliminate public property. Then people will decide for themselves how to use their own property and be responsible for the consequences.

[Acala]

If some private citizen decided to pull a gun to drive the homeless people away, not one sane person would support them, ever.

I would support a person using a gun to drive an unwanted person off their own property. The problem here is conflicting use of public property. Eliminate public property and this problem goes away.