City of Camas officials will soon consider passing an ordinance that would address unlawful camping in the city’s public spaces and, according to officials who support the ordinance, help connect Camas residents experiencing homelessness with needed services and resources.
The Council had a first look at the proposed “Unlawful Camping and Storage of Personal Property on Public Property” ordinance at its July 18 workshop. The Council is expected to discuss the issue again during a workshop on Aug. 15, and hold a public hearing on the matter in September.
If enacted, the ordinance would strike the city’s general ban on camping in public spaces and replace it with much more specific language that would not only make it unlawful for “any person to camp or store personal property, including camp facilities or camp paraphernalia” on any public property, including parks and streets,” but would also allow the city to enforce the camping ban without violating a 2019 Ninth Circuit Court ruling (Martin v. City of Boise) that prohibits cities from enforcing ordinances that criminalize camping on publicly owned property when there are no other overnight shelter options available.
Under the proposed “Unlawful Camping” ordinance, Camas police who wish to enforce the no-camping rule would first need to determine if the person who is camping unlawfully on Camas’ public property is experiencing homelessness. If so, the officer would also need to determine if the person had access to overnight shelter. If there were overnight shelter options available — most likely a shelter in Vancouver, which is part of a regional effort to prevent and end homelessness in Clark County — the officer could either provide directions to the shelter location or offer one-time transportation to the shelter. If there are no overnight shelter beds available, the Camas police officer would not be able to enforce the city’s camping ban.
Under the proposed ordinance, any person who refuses to accept the offered overnight shelter space could be found to be in violation of a misdemeanor charge and subject to fines of up to $1,000 and/or imprisonment for up to 90 days. The ordinance as written would also require the courts to authorize community service in lieu of paying a fine for those individuals who have no money to pay $100 to $1,000 in fines.