On Monday night, in a 6-1 vote, Gilroy city leaders voted to approve a proposed ordinance that would ban camping or sleeping in certain areas of the city. Some prohibited areas include schools, parks, city creeks, along with preschools and daycares. In terms of enforcement, according to the staff report, “The ordinance does not criminalize sleeping in the open. It limits the locations, prohibiting the use of certain public rights-of-way from being used as sleeping or living accommodations. It provides that the only act subject to a misdemeanor is the refusal to relocate from a prohibited area when instructed to do so by a City employee.”Police officers explained during Monday's meeting that they would use a “commonsense approach” on a “case by case” basis. They said that they would not physically move a person but will instead give them a citation, if they refuse to move. A ban that has been widely controversial, community members stood divided during the council meeting. Many who attended, spoke against the proposal. “If I take a nap in a park, am I going to be cited? No, of course not. Because I have a house, because my clothes are clean, because I drive a car. So we're really just targeting poor people who need to sleep. I work in the camps all the time. I know these community members. There are children living out there. And the reason for this is because we have a huge income and housing disparity in Gilroy, and our current housing policies do not reflect the demographic that lives here,” said Gilroy resident, Vanessa Ashford. While others in favor of the proposal argue that it’s needed to protect the environment. “We have areas like the Uvas Creek area. That's our watershed and we have to protect that. We can't have people urinating and defecating in our in that area. We had another fire that somebody set at the park Christmas Hill Park. And that's destructive. That hurts snakes, lizards, it hurts all kinds of creatures,” said Gilroy resident Ronald Kirkish. Many in favor also pointed out that it’s a concern for students and other children. "Our students and staff have reported feeling unsafe and uncomfortable when walking to school,” one person said during public comment. Ultimately, Rebecca Armendariz was the only councilmember to vote against the proposal. She said, “That money, instead of going to court and fighting our right to discriminate against people, we should be using that to invest in services for our homeless and housing our homeless. I’m disappointed in my colleagues. I think that the community is split, but I think ultimately, we all want a safe community.”People impacted by the new ordinance will be notified of it. It will be enacted and begin enforcement 30 days following the vote of Mondays approval.