A classical liberal would say that freedom consists in the right to choose your occupation and enjoy the fruits of your labor, exchanging one's earnings for food, clothing, and shelter. Freedom is not the provision of all necessities by the state.
For example, a municipality doesn't need to provide a toilet to the extent that it doesn't have a problem with the freedom to not own one. If the municipality wants to achieve hygienic high density then it should pay its debts.
(I imagine the answer might be "protection from non-state violence." But then by analogy what they owe you in exchange for banning public defecation isn't public toilets, but an environment where there isn't shit laying around in public.)
If you had no reasonable way to acquire a toilet (like all of mankind until quite recently) would you choose to explode for the reassurance that the poo you step in is from dogs and wildlife? Earlier people apparently didn't choose extinction.