Ephrata's Dirty Little Secret
Sunshine Firecracker Reporting On Ephrata Borough Criminalizing Homelessness in a Town Struggling with Compassion
Ephrata, Pennsylvania, is a picturesque town that proudly boasts the Green Dragon Farmers Market and attracts numerous visitors each year. However, behind its idyllic charm lies a darker reality: a growing homeless population that is becoming increasingly marginalized by local government policies. This issue is not just about individuals sleeping on the streets but also includes those who live in cars, bounce between couches, or find temporary shelter in storage units, offices, or even at their jobs. Ephrata’s homeless population is criminalized through ambiguous laws, denied meaningful assistance, and excluded from the community’s compassion—a crisis that has led to controversial enforcement, legal battles, and public outcry.
Mike Sznowshi: A Heartbreaking Example
Mike Sznowshi’s story encapsulates the injustice faced by Ephrata's homeless. A senior citizen battling cancer, Mike had received disability payments for over two decades before his benefits were cut off due to his inability to navigate the technology required to manage his benefits. Mike isn’t a criminal, a drug addict, or an alcoholic. He’s an elderly man with cancer, struggling with homelessness. Despite this, Mike has become a target of Ephrata’s system. When I personally spent over $5,000 on hotel bills to keep Mike off the streets, it wasn’t just to provide him shelter—it was to protect him from being sent to jail by Magisterial District Judge (MDJ) Torrey Landis. Landis has issued fines of up to $1,200 to homeless individuals for sleeping in public places, warning that they will be jailed if found sleeping in “his town” again.
Mike’s story is not unique. His treatment reflects a broader issue in Ephrata, where the borough’s actions not only lack compassion but also verge on legal and constitutional violations.
Ephrata’s Vague Anti-Camping Law: Criminalizing Survival
At the heart of the problem is Ephrata’s anti-camping statute. This statute, however, is unconstitutionally vague, failing to define what “camping” actually means. Vague laws like this give police excessive discretion to decide who should be punished, often leading to arbitrary enforcement. In Mike’s case, simply napping on a public bench is enough for him to face criminal charges.
Vagueness in the law is a major constitutional issue. According to the legal precedent set by Kolender v. Lawson (1983), laws must be clearly defined so that individuals can understand what behavior is prohibited. When laws are vague, they violate due process rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment, as individuals are not given fair notice of what constitutes illegal activity. This vagueness is a common problem with anti-camping ordinances, not just in Ephrata but in many other municipalities across the United States.
Moreover, the enforcement of these laws often leads to further marginalization of vulnerable populations. In Martin v. Boise (2019), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that cities cannot criminalize homelessness by penalizing individuals for sleeping outside when no adequate shelter is available. The court held that such enforcement violates the Eighth Amendment, which protects individuals from cruel and unusual punishment.
Despite this precedent, Ephrata continues to enforce its anti-camping law while preventing sufficient shelter options, leaving people like Mike vulnerable to both legal penalties and further hardship.
Socially Conscious Solutions: The Role of Churches
Ephrata’s homelessness crisis could be addressed through more socially conscious solutions, many of which are already being pursued by local churches like The Living Room, part of Good Samaritan Services. The Living Room operates a winter shelter at 409 N. State St., providing essential relief to homeless individuals during the coldest months of the year. However, due to zoning restrictions imposed by the borough, this shelter is only allowed to operate for 60 days each year.. This limitation leaves homeless residents without a year-round solution, forcing them back onto the streets or into makeshift living situations when the shelter is closed.
For many in the community, these zoning laws are not only restrictive but also a violation of First Amendment rights. The First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion, and for many churches, providing shelter to the homeless is a core aspect of their ministry. The borough’s zoning restrictions interfere with his church’s ability to fulfill its religious obligation to care for “the least of these,” as described in Matthew 25:40.
Church Law & Tax
This verse, which calls on Christians to help those in need, is central to the mission of churches like The Living Room, yet Ephrata’s zoning laws make it difficult for them to carry out this work.
Zoning laws that restrict church-based shelters have been challenged in courts across the United States. In First Assembly of God v. Collier County (1994), for example, a federal court upheld a zoning law that limited a church’s ability to shelter homeless individuals, ruling that the law was neutral and of general applicability. However, the court acknowledged that if a law specifically targets religious practices, it could violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
This case highlights the delicate balance between local governance and religious freedom—a balance that many argue Ephrata is tipping in favor of restrictive governance at the expense of religious rights.
Toward a Socially Conscious Future
Ephrata’s approach to homelessness stands in stark contrast to what many consider socially conscious solutions, which focus on addressing the root causes of homelessness rather than criminalizing it. Cities like Salt Lake City and Houston have adopted the Housing First model, which provides immediate housing without preconditions, followed by supportive services such as mental health counseling and job training. This approach recognizes that stability in housing is a prerequisite for addressing other issues like substance abuse or mental health disorders. It also dramatically reduces the cost of policing and emergency services, which are often overburdened when homelessness is criminalized rather than treated as a social issue..
Ephrata could benefit from adopting similar models. By expanding its shelter programs, removing restrictive zoning laws, and working in partnership with churches and local organizations, the town could create a more compassionate and effective system for addressing homelessness. Instead of criminalizing people for simply trying to survive, Ephrata could provide them with the support they need to rebuild their lives.
Furthermore, there is growing evidence that criminalizing homelessness is not only ineffective but also counterproductive. Studies show that people who are fined or jailed for being homeless are more likely to remain homeless, as they accrue debt and face additional barriers to employment and housing. In contrast, cities that invest in supportive housing and services see a reduction in homelessness and an overall improvement in community well-being.
Conclusion
Ephrata, Pennsylvania, faces a critical decision: Will it continue to criminalize its homeless population, or will it embrace a more socially conscious approach that aligns with both legal precedents and the compassionate values of its community? The stories of individuals like Mike Sznowski demonstrate the deep flaws in the current system. By relying on vague laws, harsh penalties, and restrictive zoning regulations, Ephrata is pushing its most vulnerable residents further into the margins.
The borough has an opportunity to change course by adopting policies that prioritize housing, health, and human dignity over punishment. Churches like The Living Room are ready to step up and offer their support, but they need the freedom to do so without the burden of restrictive zoning laws. It’s time for Ephrata to confront its “dirty little secret” with compassion, legal fairness, and a commitment to social justice. Only then can it truly be the kind of community it aspires to be—one that supports all of its residents, especially those who are most in need.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Sunshine Firecracker and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Coercive Control
Coercive control, and its emotional and financial abuse, constitute a form of "serious bodily harm" as defined under 50 Pa. Stat. § 7304, which allows for involuntary emergency treatment when an individual poses a clear and present danger of harm to themselves or others. The statute recognizes that serious bodily harm includes not just physical injuries but also the significant physical consequences that result from psychological trauma and deprivation of essential resources, such as food, shelter, and healthcare. The detrimental physical effects caused by chronic stress, anxiety, and deprivation, stemming from coercive control, clearly satisfy this statutory requirement for "serious bodily harm."
By Sunshine Firecrackerabout a year ago in The Swamp
‘An Incomprehensible Nightmare’: Grief Turns to Anger Over Swiss Bar Fire as Le Constellation Owner Arrested
New Year’s Eve is meant to symbolize hope, renewal, and fresh beginnings. In the Swiss Alpine resort town of Crans-Montana, however, the arrival of 2026 became a moment of unimaginable horror. A devastating fire at the popular nightclub Le Constellation claimed 40 lives and injured more than a hundred others, transforming a place of music and celebration into the epicenter of one of Switzerland’s deadliest peacetime disasters in decades. What followed was a wave of national mourning — and then something more powerful. As details emerged, grief began to turn into anger, and a collective question echoed across Switzerland and beyond: How could this have happened? A Night That Changed Everything Shortly after midnight on January 1, Le Constellation was packed with young people celebrating the New Year. Witnesses recall a festive atmosphere, champagne flowing, music pulsing, and crowds pressed close together. Within minutes, everything changed. Investigators believe that sparkler-style fireworks attached to champagne bottles ignited flammable soundproofing material on the ceiling. Flames spread rapidly through the confined basement space, filling the venue with smoke and heat before many people could react. Panic followed. Survivors described a desperate rush for exits, poor visibility, and crushing crowds as people tried to escape. Some broke windows. Others were trapped. Emergency services arrived quickly, but the fire’s speed and intensity left little chance for many inside. By dawn, the scale of the tragedy was clear. A Community in Mourning Crans-Montana, better known for ski holidays and postcard-perfect views, became a town united by sorrow. Many of the victims were teenagers and young adults, some as young as 14. Families from Switzerland, France, and Italy gathered in hospitals, churches, and temporary shelters, searching for answers and clinging to hope. A national day of mourning was declared. Bells rang across the country. Vigils were held, candles lit, and names read aloud. Swiss leaders were joined by foreign dignitaries in remembrance ceremonies, underscoring the international impact of the loss. But even as memorials continued, troubling information began to surface. From Grief to Outrage Public emotion shifted dramatically when authorities revealed that Le Constellation had not undergone a mandatory fire safety inspection since 2019, despite regulations requiring regular checks for venues hosting large crowds. For many families, this disclosure felt like a second shock. How could a nightclub operate for years without inspection? Who was responsible for ensuring safety standards were met? And why were obvious risks — such as indoor fireworks — allowed at all? The mayor of Crans-Montana acknowledged failures in oversight, admitting that inspections simply had not taken place. That admission sparked widespread anger, not only toward the bar’s owners but also toward local authorities and regulatory bodies. On social media and in public forums, the tone changed from mourning to demand: someone must be held accountable. The Arrest That Changed the Investigation That demand intensified when Swiss prosecutors announced the arrest of Jacques Moretti, co-owner of Le Constellation. Authorities placed him in pre-trial detention, citing concerns that he could leave the country and potentially evade justice. Prosecutors are now investigating possible charges including involuntary homicide, negligence, and causing bodily harm. His wife and business partner was questioned separately and placed under house arrest. For many families, the arrest offered a measure of reassurance — a sign that the tragedy was being taken seriously. For others, it raised further questions about how responsibility would ultimately be shared between private owners and public institutions. Voices of the Survivors Amid legal developments, survivors continue to process their trauma. Some remain hospitalized with severe burns and smoke inhalation injuries. Others are physically safe but psychologically scarred. Several have described recurring nightmares, survivor’s guilt, and a sense of disbelief that they lived while friends did not. Parents of victims have spoken of empty bedrooms, unfinished dreams, and futures erased in minutes. Their testimonies have become a powerful reminder that behind every statistic is a human life — and that accountability is not abstract, but deeply personal. A National Reckoning on Safety The fire has triggered a sweeping review of fire safety standards across Switzerland. Authorities have launched inspections of nightclubs, bars, and event spaces nationwide. Indoor pyrotechnics are being restricted or banned, and enforcement mechanisms are under renewed scrutiny. Yet critics argue that inspections alone are not enough. They are calling for: Clearer responsibility between municipalities and venue owners Transparent public records of safety inspections Stronger penalties for non-compliance Faster intervention when risks are identified If a disaster of this scale can happen in a country renowned for precision and regulation, many ask, what does that mean for public safety elsewhere? An Incomprehensible Nightmare — and a Turning Point The phrase repeated by grieving families — “an incomprehensible nightmare” — captures the emotional weight of the tragedy. But as legal proceedings move forward, that nightmare may also become a turning point. The Le Constellation fire has exposed systemic weaknesses, forced uncomfortable truths into the open, and sparked a nationwide conversation about responsibility, prevention, and justice. Whether those conversations lead to lasting reform remains to be seen. What is certain is this: the 40 lives lost on that New Year’s night will not be forgotten — and for many, justice will mean ensuring that such a tragedy never happens again.
By Muhammad Hassan3 days ago in The Swamp
Day 4 of Quitting
If this is how sobriety feels, maybe it’s better to go through life a little buzzed… this, along with other hits like, I want to kill myself, I wish I was dead, and I’m going to throw myself off a bridge have been the only thoughts on rotation these past few days. I promise myself that if, in a month, I still feel like this (‘this’ meaning despondent, full of rage, and simultaneously numb) I can go back to smoking. Until mid-February though? Nicotine is off the table.
By sleepy drafts6 days ago in Longevity
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.