Philadelphia, plagued by drugs, passes bill to prohibit supervised drug sites.

Philadelphia Bans Supervised Drug Consumption ⁣Sites in Effort to Curb⁢ Public Drug Use

Philadelphia passed a bill last week ⁢banning supervised drug consumption⁣ sites across most of the city in the latest ‍attempt by a Democrat-run city‍ to​ curb rampant public drug use.

The ‌Philadelphia City Council approved the ⁣ban Thursday in a 13-1 vote during a heated meeting where dozens of people ⁤on both ⁢sides of the issue showed ⁤up to cheer⁢ and⁤ heckle speakers.

The bill​ now heads to‌ Mayor Jim‌ Kenney, ‍a Democrat, who supports ​supervised drug consumption sites ⁤and may refuse to sign it. However, the⁤ city council passed the ⁢bill with enough⁤ of a majority to ⁤ override a veto⁣ should the mayor issue one.

The legislation would update zoning codes to ⁣ban supervised drug consumption sites‍ in nine of the city’s ten ⁤districts, including‍ in the Kensington neighborhood, where homeless people dealing and‍ shooting up ⁣drugs line ⁣the streets.

Supervised drug ⁢consumption sites involve allowing ‍people to ⁣bring their own drugs and take them⁤ under ‌supervision of clinicians to prevent ⁣an overdose. ​Such sites often offer addicts supplies like clean needles and information about addiction treatment as well.

The bill‍ was drafted ⁢by Councilmember Quetcy Lozada, who represents the Kensington area, home to one of‌ the country’s largest open-air drug markets. She said most of the people opposing the bill do not live in​ the neighborhoods​ struggling the most with drug ​addiction.

“I​ will not apologize for⁣ making⁤ the voice of the people who live⁣ in my community a priority,” Lozada⁣ said at Thursday’s council meeting. “I would like those ⁤of you‌ who don’t​ live in the Kensington community ‌to be respectful⁣ of those individuals who are⁢ raising their families there and who experience and are impacted by ‌what⁣ they ‍go‌ through every​ day.”

Philadelphia’s drug overdose crisis ​peaked in 2021 when 1,276 people fatally overdosed. Since then, harrowing scenes of⁣ addicts with skin‍ lesions, high and doubled over have continued to ⁤come out of the⁤ city.

The Kensington neighborhood is also ‍struggling with an ⁣influx of a new drug, Xylazine, called “tranq” on the street, a⁣ cheap, flesh-rotting horse tranquilizer flooding the U.S. illegal drug market.

Xylazine ​is mass-manufactured in China‍ and⁤ causes skin lesions that ⁢look like flesh ⁣is being eaten off. ‌Drug dealers ⁤frequently mix Xylazine with other drugs, and Narcan, the emergency opioid reverse medicine, does not work on ⁣“tranq” since ⁢Xylazine is not​ an opioid.

Philadelphia’s move comes​ just one week ‍after Portland, another ⁣city struggling to address its ⁤public drug use crisis, passed a ban on‍ using hard drugs on public property.

Oregon’s state legislature would‍ have to approve Portland’s ban,‌ however, meaning the state would have to reverse its recent decision to decriminalize ⁢hard⁣ drug use.

Portland’s emergency ordinance attaches criminal penalties to ‍drug use on public property, namely up to six months ‌in jail or a $500 fine.

In 2021, New⁣ York City became the first⁢ city to ​allow supervised ​drug consumption​ sites. In the first⁤ three months, the city’s two locations in upper Manhattan reportedly saw about 800 people⁣ who made 9,500 ‍ visits. Staff claim ⁣ they have prevented more than 1,000 overdoses ⁢since the sites opened. However,⁢ at one point, two regulars ⁤of the sites died when⁤ they overdosed ⁤elsewhere while the sites⁢ were closed at⁣ night.

Last year, California Democratic Governor ‍Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would have allowed certain California cities ‌to open supervised drug injection ⁢sites, saying‍ that while he supports “harm reduction strategies,” he was worried about “a world of unintended consequences” from approving unlimited⁤ sites.

In 2022, more than 110,000⁤ people‌ died‌ of‍ drug overdoses in the⁢ U.S., according‌ to federal data.

How have ‍supervised drug⁤ consumption sites been linked to ‌an increase in overdose deaths in Philadelphia?

E it is not ⁣an opioid. This has led to an increase in‍ overdose deaths ⁢in the area.

The ‌implementation of ​supervised drug ‌consumption sites has been a contentious⁣ issue in Philadelphia. Supporters argue ⁤that these sites⁣ provide a safer environment ⁣for drug users and can help reduce overdose deaths. They also argue that these sites can connect individuals with addiction treatment ‌programs and other healthcare services. However, opponents believe that these sites enable and normalize drug use, and that they attract crime and negatively impact surrounding neighborhoods.

The ban on supervised drug consumption sites in Philadelphia reflects the⁣ ongoing debate on how​ to‌ address the city’s drug​ crisis. While some argue that these​ sites ⁤are a necessary harm reduction strategy, others believe that a ‌more comprehensive approach is needed to address the root causes of addiction and provide treatment and support services.

The passage of this bill has ⁣ignited a fierce debate within the ‌city.⁣ Supporters of the ban argue that​ it ⁣is an important step toward reducing public drug use and improving the safety and well-being‌ of the community. They​ argue that ​the presence ‍of supervised drug consumption sites can perpetuate a cycle of ⁣addiction and enable drug ⁢use in public spaces. Critics of the ban, on the​ other hand, argue‌ that it ⁢will further marginalize and stigmatize drug ‌users, pushing‌ them into more dangerous situations and exacerbating the overdose crisis.

Mayor Jim Kenney’s stance on the⁣ issue remains uncertain. As a supporter of supervised drug consumption sites, he may choose⁤ to veto the bill. However, the‍ city council’s overwhelming majority vote suggests that⁢ they have ‌the power to override a potential veto.⁤ The final decision rests‍ in the hands of ⁣the mayor, who will need to weigh the opinions and concerns of ⁣all stakeholders involved.

Regardless of the outcome,‌ it is‍ clear that Philadelphia’s‍ drug crisis ‌is a complex issue that requires a multifaceted approach. Simply banning supervised drug⁣ consumption sites may​ not address the underlying ⁤causes of addiction ⁤or provide the necessary support and resources for those struggling with substance abuse. It​ is crucial for the city to invest in prevention, education, and treatment programs that can help individuals break free from the grips of addiction and​ rebuild their lives.

In the end, the⁢ ban on supervised drug consumption sites in Philadelphia is just‍ one piece​ of a much larger puzzle. As the city continues to grapple ⁤with the devastating impacts of⁢ drug addiction, it is essential for policymakers, healthcare providers, and the community to work together⁢ to find comprehensive solutions that prioritize public safety, health, and compassion. Only through a collective effort can we hope to make progress in combating the drug crisis and helping ‌those in need.