Advocate warns Parlier of legal action over treatment of unhoused residents

Ben Thomas, who identified himself as president of the Homeless and Parlier Advocacy Group, told the Parlier City Council on Dec. 7 that the city’s treatment of people experiencing homelessness could violate constitutional protections and cited federal and local court rulings as precedent.

Thomas said the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Martin v. Boise (2018) and the Kinkade v. City of Fresno settlement show courts are scrutinizing cities that enforce anti-camping rules against people who lack shelter. “The way homeless people have been treated here in Parlier falls under the cruel and unusual punishment of the Constitution,” he said, and urged the council to consider humane alternatives such as tiny-home villages and portable restrooms. Thomas said he and local attorneys have contacted the American Civil Liberties Union and that plaintiffs are prepared to bring litigation if the city does not provide alternatives.

Why it matters: Thomas warned that litigation can be costly and time-consuming; he cited Kinkade v. Fresno as an example that led to a reported $2,400,000 settlement and court oversight in Fresno. He urged Parlier officials to pursue scaled, local solutions — such as tiny-home units adjusted to Parlier’s roughly 15,000-person population — to avoid similar outcomes.

Council response and procedure: Council members repeatedly told Thomas to confine his remarks to the presentation topic and the five- or 15-minute time limits posted for presenters. Staff and council members said the agenda item was meant to allow Thomas to describe what he wants to see happen locally, not to litigate or litigate precedent from other jurisdictions. City staff offered to accept documentation and minutes for the record and discussed next steps for staff follow-up.

What Thomas asked for: He urged the city to stop clearing encampments in a way that discards belongings, to fund shelter alternatives, and to pursue collaborative solutions modeled in nearby cities (he named Fresno, Visalia, Watsonville and Salinas). Thomas said the group would notify the city that legal action was forthcoming if Parlier did not move toward alternatives.

What the record shows: Thomas’s presentation referenced Martin v. Boise and Kinkade v. City of Fresno and characterized those decisions as requiring jurisdictions to provide alternatives for people who cannot access shelter. The mayor and staff repeatedly declined to treat the presentation as case-law analysis and emphasized the council’s interest in hearing specific local proposals that could be implemented in Parlier.