Worcester City Council sends homeless camping ban plan back for revisions after backlash over fines

WORCESTER — During the Worcester City Council meeting on September 22, 2026, councilors declined to pass a controversial public camping ordinance that would have banned sleeping or living in vehicles on public property, instead voting to send the proposal back to the city manager for a rewrite.

The item, listed as 18B in the agenda and presented as part of the administration’s “Disrupting the Cycle” strategic framework for supporting unhoused people, would have imposed 72-hour eviction notices and $25 a day fines for camping on public property.

The proposal drew more than two hours of public comment, almost entirely in opposition.

During public comment, a man who identified himself only as Peter and said he lives in Worcester’s District 5 advocated a socialist approach to housing and said the Central Massachusetts and Worcester Democratic Socialists of America want to address what they view as the root causes of homelessness. He argued that homelessness is rooted in a housing system dependent on private investment and profit, which he said incentivizes high rents, benefits property owners and developers, and leaves police to protect property interests by displacing unhoused people rather than addressing the lack of housing. He advocated instead for publicly oriented social housing built by workers and democratically managed by tenants.

“Do cities like Worcester hand incentives to developers that steal their employees wages and threaten them with deportation? It’s because we’re told to rely on private capital to build housing, employ people and run society. And so, those things will only happen on terms that are good for the capitalist class,” Peter said. Adding, “Working class tenants will get the cheapest construction for the highest rent so property owners can have the best profit and the quickest return. If we are lucky, two or three new apartments will get a tiny discount for two to five years and be called affordable.”

Also during public comment, Abby Mortillaro, a Worcester resident, called the camping ban fascist.

“18B, the camping ban, is fascism,” Mortillaro said. Later adding, “It is fascism, you know, if you criminalize homelessness…they’re not going to be able to pay the fine.”

When the council took up 18B later in the meeting, Councilor-at-Large Gary Rosen said he agreed the city needs a plan and credited the proposal for recognizing that Worcester hasn’t done well with addressing homelessness in the city, but said he couldn’t support it in its present form because it penalizes homelessness.

“Get rid of the fines, I’ll never vote to find the homeless,” Councilor Rosen said. “Get rid of the criminalization of the homeless.”

Mayor Joe Petty agreed the proposal should be returned to the city manager and said he did not support fining homeless residents or criminalizing homelessness.

“We shouldn’t have a fine, and we just need to show some dignity and respect to the people who are homeless here,” Mayor Petty said.

Councilors also learned during questioning that organizations involved in developing the homelessness strategy had not been asked for feedback on the $25 fine before it was added to the ordinance. City officials said people with lived experience of homelessness also had not provided input specifically on the fine and potential criminal-enforcement provisions.

A motion to file the ordinance, which would have killed it outright, failed 1-8, with only Council Vice Chairman Khrystian King voting yes. A subsequent motion to recommit the ordinance to the city manager for a revision passed 8-1, with Councilor-at-Large Morris Bergman opposed, King abstaining, and Councilor-at-Large Kathleen Toomey recused herself because she was absent.