Item B: Homeless Camping - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

pilot program for 120 days and council shall then review the pilot program and assess whether or not to continue the ordinance.” The attached draft ordinance (Attachment A) was included with the agenda item summary (AIS) materials for the May 20 work session and incorporates each of these options. The draft ordinance is annotated with comments that explain the ordinance’s provisions and how the provisions address the three options. At the most recent work session, the council offered a number of questions and comments including several modifications to the site criteria, the scope of work, liability, community partnerships, and other related issues. It is not clear where consensus lies with regard to any of the discussion topics; an attempt has been made to provide updated materials that best reflect the discussion to this point. Sites – Attachment B is a refreshed list of potential homeless camping sites representing undeveloped City-owned properties and for which the criteria for inclusion on the updated list is more specifically described on the attachment. Note there are a total of 20 sites including 11 undeveloped parks and nine properties that are not part of the parks inventory. Attachments C thru F are maps that depict the sites graphically. Scope of Work – There has been considerable discussion around various pilot programs but less clarity on the specific desired outcomes. Council guidance on a number of specific questions would assist with defining the actual scope of work. In particular, this conversation began with a suggestion to consider amending the camping ordinance to allow dusk-to-dawn camping in City parks. There has subsequently been discussion of the concept of “rest stops,” hosted semi- permanent facilities, and more substantial accommodations than initially contemplated. Some specific questions for council deliberation might include: 1.Should one or more sleep sites be established? If so, should these be in parks, other City properties, both, neither? 2.What are the site criteria? 3.Should the sites be hosted or otherwise managed and should tenants be screened for compatibility? 4.What amenities should be provided? Restrooms? Garbage collection? Storage lockers? Other? 5.How should neighborhoods be involved in siting decisions? 6.What are the desired outcomes in terms of number of campers per site, hours of operation, cleanup, behaviors, etc.? Liability – Some of the councilors as well as the SLEEPS advocates have asked questions related to liability. The City Attorney suggests that many of the options that have been discussed might increase the potential liability of and risk to the City, but generally, there are ways to mitigate the risk so that the risk is no greater than for many of the City’s other programs. It is difficult to identify the potential risk for all of the different ways in which a program can be structured as the details could make a difference. The City Attorney’s office recommends that the council identify the specific programs or outcomes that – as a policy matter – it would like to pursue. The City Attorney’s office can provide the council with both an assessment of the risk for those specific proposals, and if the risk is significant, with possible options to reduce the risk. S:\CMO\2013 Council Agendas\M130626\S130626B.doc