WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 6345

AN ACT PROHIBITING A MUNICIPALITY FROM IMPOSING A PENALTY ON HOMELESS PERSONS FOR UNDERTAKING LIFE-SUSTAINING ACTIVITIES ON PUBLIC LAND.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Josh Elliott and 2 co-sponsors

Connecticut would prohibit municipalities from penalizing homeless individuals for survival activities on public land, decriminalizing homelessness and redirecting enforcement toward social services.

REF. TO JOINT COMM. ON Housing
#fines(penalties) #homelesspersons #municipalproperty #municipalities
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6345

Legislative bill overview

HB 6345 would prohibit Connecticut municipalities from penalizing homeless individuals for performing essential survival activities—such as sleeping, eating, or sheltering themselves—on public land. The bill effectively decriminalizes conduct necessary for survival when no alternative exists, preventing citations, fines, or arrests based solely on homelessness status.

Why is this important

This addresses a widespread legal barrier homeless individuals face: many municipalities have ordinances that effectively criminalize homelessness by banning the basic activities required to survive outdoors. This bill could reduce the criminalization cycle that often traps homeless people in legal systems, allowing resources to shift toward housing and services rather than enforcement. It aligns with growing national recognition that criminalizing poverty is counterproductive and expensive.

Potential points of contention

  • Public space management: Cities argue they need ordinances to manage sanitation, safety, and quality-of-life concerns in parks and public areas; opponents may claim this eliminates necessary tools
  • Definition of "life-sustaining activities": The bill's scope depends on how narrowly or broadly "undertaking life-sustaining activities" is interpreted—ambiguity could create enforcement challenges
  • Local control vs. state mandate: Municipalities may resist state-level prohibition of local ordinances as an infringement on home rule authority
  • Implementation without resources: Critics may argue the bill doesn't provide funding for housing or social services that would replace criminalization as a response

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.