top of page
Search

Lancaster Mayor’s Controversial Fentanyl Remark Ignites Debate on Homelessness and Public Policy

  • Writer: 17GEN4
    17GEN4
  • Apr 21
  • 5 min read

LANCASTER, Calif. — Mayor R. Rex Parris of Lancaster, California, has provoked widespread condemnation following remarks made during a February 25, 2025, city council meeting, where he suggested providing homeless individuals with “all the fentanyl they want” as a means to address homelessness and associated crime. The statement, which Parris later described as a metaphorical expression of frustration, has fueled intense public outcry, calls for his recall, and a broader discussion about homelessness, substance abuse, and ethical governance.


The controversy erupted when Parris responded to a resident’s concerns about a proposed plan to relocate Lancaster’s homeless population to an abandoned golf course. “What I want to do is give them free fentanyl,” Parris stated, reiterating, “I want to give them all the fentanyl they want” (Los Angeles Times, 2025). The comments, made in the context of rising homelessness and crime concerns in Lancaster, were perceived by many as callous and inhumane, given fentanyl’s role in over 74,000 overdose deaths in the United States in 2023 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2024).


Parris, a Republican and trial lawyer who has served as mayor since 2008, later clarified in an interview with Fox 11 Los Angeles that his remarks were not meant literally but were intended to highlight the challenges posed by a “criminal element” within the homeless population, which he claimed constitutes 40-45% of the unhoused in Lancaster (Fox News, 2025). He further suggested a federal “purge” to address the issue, stating, “We do need to purge these people” (New York Post, 2025). These statements have drawn sharp criticism from community advocates, political opponents, and scholars, who argue they dehumanize vulnerable populations and undermine public trust in governance.


Public and Political Backlash

The Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count reported 6,672 individuals experiencing homelessness in Lancaster and surrounding areas in 2024, a 42% increase from 2023 (Antelope Valley Press, 2024). This growing crisis, coupled with California’s broader fentanyl epidemic, has placed significant pressure on local leaders to devise effective solutions. However, Parris’ remarks have been widely condemned as counterproductive. Johnathon Ervin, a Democratic candidate who ran against Parris in the 2024 mayoral election, denounced the mayor’s rhetoric, stating, “Anyone willing to give homeless people all the fentanyl they want, or to suggest that President Trump should allow a purge of the homeless population, has no business in public office” (Los Angeles Times, 2025). Ervin, alongside Mark Maldonado, another former opponent, has launched a recall campaign, though it has garnered only 6% of the required 20,000 signatures as of April 20, 2025 (Fox News, 2025).

Public sentiment on social media has been equally vehement, with one user commenting, “Jesus welcomed the homeless. You want to murder them,” in response to a biblical message Parris posted on Easter (Daily Mail, 2025). Protests have also emerged, echoing previous demonstrations against Parris’ comments on homelessness, such as a 2019 rally demanding an apology for his suggestion that residents arm themselves against homeless individuals (Antelope Valley Press, 2019).


Scholarly Perspectives

Scholars of public policy and social welfare have criticized Parris’ remarks for their ethical and practical implications. Dr. Margot Kushel, director of the UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations, argues that such rhetoric exacerbates stigma and diverts attention from evidence-based solutions like housing-first models and harm reduction strategies (Kushel, 2021). “Dehumanizing language undermines trust and perpetuates cycles of marginalization,” Kushel notes, emphasizing that homelessness is often rooted in structural issues like housing unaffordability and inadequate mental health services.


Similarly, Dr. Sam Tsemberis, founder of the Housing First model, highlights the effectiveness of permanent supportive housing in reducing homelessness and associated substance use disorders (Tsemberis, 2010). “Provocative statements like these ignore decades of research showing that compassionate, systemic interventions work,” Tsemberis asserts. Studies demonstrate that housing-first approaches reduce emergency service costs by 34% and improve health outcomes for unhoused individuals (National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2023).


Parris’ reference to fentanyl also raises concerns among addiction researchers. Dr. Daniel Ciccarone, a professor at UCSF studying the opioid crisis, notes that fentanyl’s high potency and accessibility have driven overdose rates, with 2 milligrams capable of causing death (Ciccarone, 2020). Ciccarone warns that inflammatory rhetoric risks normalizing dangerous narratives about substance use, potentially undermining harm reduction efforts like naloxone distribution and supervised consumption sites.


Parris’ Defense and Policy Context

In defending his remarks, Parris argued that Lancaster has implemented “innovative” solutions, including the Homeless Impact Commission and partnerships with faith-based organizations to secure mental health and housing resources (rrexparrisformayor.com, 2023). He claimed his comments targeted “criminal elements” who “refuse” help, asserting without evidence that they are responsible for “most of our robberies, most of our rapes, and at least half of our murders” (New York Post, 2025). However, criminological research suggests that homeless individuals are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators, with only a small subset engaging in serious crime (Fischer et al., 2019).


Lancaster’s homelessness crisis reflects broader challenges in California, where soaring housing costs and stagnant development have exacerbated displacement (California Housing Partnership, 2024). The state’s fentanyl crisis, driven by illicitly manufactured supplies, has further complicated efforts to address substance use among unhoused populations (Ciccarone, 2020). Parris’ remarks come at a time when public frustration with visible homelessness has intensified, yet scholars argue that punitive approaches, such as encampment sweeps, often worsen outcomes (Herring, 2019).


Looking Forward

As Parris’ term extends until April 2028, the recall effort faces significant hurdles, requiring substantial community support to succeed. The controversy has sparked renewed calls for compassionate, evidence-based policies to address homelessness and substance use. Advocates urge investment in affordable housing, mental health services, and harm reduction programs, which have proven effective in cities like San Francisco and Seattle (National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2023).


For now, Parris’ remarks have deepened divisions in Lancaster, raising critical questions about the role of public officials in shaping discourse on complex social issues. As Dr. Kushel observes, “Leadership requires empathy and precision, not provocation” (Kushel, 2021). The path forward will depend on whether Lancaster can bridge these divides to address its growing homelessness crisis humanely and effectively.


References








 
 
 

Comentarios

bottom of page