agenda lacey planning commission meeting tuesday, …...jul 02, 2019 · mark mininger, shaunesy...

of 1

AGENDA

LACEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, July 2, 2019 – 7:00 p.m.

Lacey City Hall Council Chambers, 420 College Street SE

Call to Order: 7:00 p.m.

A. Roll Call B. Approval of Agenda & Consent Agenda Items*

Approval of the June 18, 2019, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Public Comments: 7:01 p.m. Commission Members Reports: 7:03 p.m. Director’s Report: 7:05 p.m. Old Business: 7:10 p.m. Emergency Housing Facilities LMC 16.64: Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager. The Planning Commission will conduct a follow-up work session on draft revisions to LMC 16.64 related to Emergency Housing Facilities. The purpose of the work session is to continue to review comments received from the public hearing and discuss any modifications to the draft regulations as a result. At the conclusion of the work session, the Planning Commission is requested to schedule a second public hearing to take additional public testimony on a revised draft for August 6. Communications and Announcements: 8:55 p.m. Next Meeting: July 16, 2019. Adjournment: 9:00 p.m.

6/24/19

CITY OF LACEY PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SCHEDULE

Planning Commission Meeting July 2, 2019 Packets due: June 27th

1. Work Session: Emergency Housing Facility Regulations

Planning Commission Meeting July 16, 2019 Packets due: July 11th

1. Work Session: Revisions to Rules of Procedure 2. Work Session: Economic Development Briefing

Planning Commission Meeting August 6, 2019 Packets due: August 1st

1. Public Hearing/Work Session: Emergency Housing Facility Regulations

Planning Commission Meeting August 20, 2019 Packets due: August 15th

1. Public Hearing: Low Density Zone Consolidation 2. Work Session: Economic Development Briefing

Future Items: Hawks Prairie Business District History Lacey Makerspace Port of Olympia ILA NE Lacey Industrial Woodland District Branding

of 3

MINUTES

Lacey Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, June 18, 2019 – 7:00 p.m.

Lacey City Hall Council Chambers, 420 College Street SE Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Paul Enns. Planning Commission members present: Paul Enns, Sharon Kophs, David Wasson, Daphne Retzlaff, Mark Mininger, Shaunesy Behrens, Eddie Bishop, and David Lousteau. Staff present: Ryan Andrews, Jessica Brandt, Rick Walk, George Smith, Doug Christenson, and Leah Bender. Paul Enns noted a quorum present. David Wasson made a motion, seconded by Sharon Kophs, to approve the agenda for tonight’s meeting. All were in favor, the motion carried. David Wasson made a motion, seconded by David Lousteau, to approve the June 4, 2019, minutes. All were in favor, the motion carried. 1. Public Comments: None. 2. Commission Members Reports:

Paul Enns expressed appreciation for staff and all the work and time they put into Planning Commission. Paul acknowledged that former Planning Commissioners Gail Madden and Carolyn Cox were present at tonight’s meeting.

Eddie Bishop reported on his attendance at the last Council meeting.

3. Director’s Report: Rick Walk reported on the Council action regarding the camping ordinance, and noted that Council

may find it necessary to approve a temporary emergency ordinance for Emergency Housing Facilities to allow the City to host overnight encampments.

Rick gave an update on the mitigation site. Rick noted the Council on the Road meeting will be at 6 p.m., Thursday, June 20, at Salish Middle

School.

4. Public Hearing: Affordable Housing Strategy: Ryan Andrews gave some background information and shared a PowerPoint presentation. Ryan shared some additional comments that were received. There was a discussion regarding Habitat for Humanity home prices. A typo was pointed out where “developed” should be “developable.” It was suggested that Action 8 be reworded so as not to give the appearance that the Emergency

Housing Facilities ordinance has been approved prior to following the process for approval. Staff noted that as this document is a strategy and not an ordinance, that the Action is adequate as is.

There was a discussion regarding median age range. Ryan noted that the issue has not been addressed directly in the strategy but can be looked into further.

Paul Enns opened the hearing up to public testimony. Craig Chance, Housing Authority of Thurston County, spoke in favor of the strategy. He explained

the issues regarding keeping housing affordable versus the 50% equity involved with development. He noted that it will help if the City can waive fees and provide land.

Lisa Gillati spoke in favor of the strategy and appreciates what the City is doing for affordable housing and the homeless. She said she is the founder of Build a Bus, which converts school busses into homes.

of 3

Joel Carlson asked about State legislation regarding condo liability. Ryan noted that it is included in one of the Actions.

Jim Stanton said that people on fixed incomes should be included in the Real People Example section. He suggested that an action item be added to decrease the percentage of underutilized housing we already have.

Jesse Orndorff asked how we can make sure people in affordable housing continue to maintain utilities, etc. He pointed out that the City does not have a utility assistance program, that it is solely donation based.

Kirsten York with Community Action Council noted that her agency provides utilities assistance as well as energy efficiency programs. She recommended that the strategy focus on preventing homelessness as they will be taking over the coordinated entry program for homeless single adults on July 1.

Gail Madden spoke in favor of the strategy. She expressed the importance of having a strategy in place to be prepared to deal with the need for affordable housing and homelessness.

Felix Peguero pointed out that the root cause of homelessness is drug addiction and did not see that issue addressed in the strategy.

Paul Enns closed the public hearing. Mark Mininger said he thinks the strategy is a great plan but has some outstanding issues that

should be discussed in a worksession. Sharon Kophs asked how Community Action Council disseminates information about the

resources they have available. Kirsten said there are lists and a website and that they work with people to discuss eligibility and provide referrals.

David Lousteau asked if there is a way to incentivize converting single family homes with empty bedrooms to better utilize existing housing. Rick noted that these issues can be discussed during the review of the low density consolidation.

Sharon Kophs made a motion, seconded by David Lousteau, to recommend the Affordable Housing Strategy to Council.

There was a discussion regarding amending and reviewing the strategy after it is adopted. Eddie Bishop asked Mark what specifically it is he would like to improve. Mark said he is

concerned about Action 8 because it appears we are endorsing the Emergency Housing Facilities ordinance, donation of city land, and allowing multi-family homes next to single-family homes. Sharon noted that these concerns can be addressed under ordinance reviews. Ryan explained that the strategy lists possible actions, while the ordinances are regulations. Rick noted the strategy is not a preapproval of the ordinance items. David Lousteau suggested the recommendation be made to council with a note about the public concerns regarding emergency housing. Staff stated that Council is well aware of public concerns.

A vote was taken on the motion to recommend the Affordable Housing Strategy to Council. Seven were in favor, one opposed. The motion carried.

Ryan noted that the recommendation will go to Council with the 2019 Comp Plan amendments. Work will continue on the Emergency Housing Facilities ordinance and that item may go to Council prior to the Affordable Housing Strategy.

5. New Business:

Economic Development Briefing: George Smith shared a PowerPoint presentation that gave an overview of the Economic

Development Element and Strategy. There was a discussion about economic development ethics. It was noted that “Lacey is Ethical” would be more of an attribute than a goal, and there was a lack

of specificity on how the City will work toward achieving the goals in the element. George explained that the presentation is very much a summary of the element and the actual Economic Development Element and Strategy have much more information and detail.

of 3

Positive feedback was given for Policy F – preparedness for a natural disaster, business roundtable, and suppliers recruitment.

Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Update: Doug Christenson gave some background information and went over the primary purposes and the

three parts of the plan. Doug noted that the upcoming National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit

will be issued July 1 and will take effect August 1. After the permit is received, staff will make adjustments to the final draft and complete the initial

review. After public outreach, the draft will come back to Planning Commission in mid-August, a public hearing will be held in early September, and the update will be completed by late September.

There were discussions about enforcement and low-impact development. 6. Communications and Announcements: Rick noted that he learned of a new series of the “Seattle is

Dying” documentary that will look at the Los Angeles area.

7. Next meeting: July 2, 2019.

8. Adjournment: 9:10 p.m.

of 4

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

July 2, 2019

SUBJECT: LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities ________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will conduct a follow-up work session on draft

revisions to LMC 16.64 related to Emergency Housing Facilities. The purpose of the work session is to continue to review comments received from the public hearing and discuss any modifications to the draft regulations as a result. At the conclusion of the work session, the Planning Commission is requested to schedule a second public hearing to take additional public testimony on the revised draft for August 6th.

TO: Lacey Planning Commission STAFF CONTACTS: Rick Walk, Community and Economic Development Director Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Policies Related to City’s Response to Homelessness from 2016

Housing Element 2. Draft LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities (Track Changes)

3. Draft LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities (Clean Version) 4. May 21st Public Hearing Written Comment Record PRIOR COUNCIL/ COMMISSION/ COMMITTEE REVIEW: June 4, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting

May 21, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing April 16, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting March 5, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting February 19, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting

BACKGROUND: In 2008 the City adopted its first homeless encampment regulations (LMC 16.64). The adoption of the regulations were in conjunction with the establishment of Camp Quixote. Camp Quixote began as an encampment that temporarily located in downtown Olympia and relocated several times including a period in Lacey. The Camp Quixote model was for a church or other religious organization to host the encampment over a six-month period and would then be required to relocate. The encampment included support from the non-profit organization Panza which provided support including rigorous self-governance and code of

of 4

conduct. With the development of Quixote Village, a residential community of tiny homes located in west Olympia, the encampment model of Camp Quixote ceased. Since Camp Quixote, there has been a gap in providing centralized services to those individuals experiencing homelessness in Lacey. To address this gap, the Housing Strategy identifies the need to update City codes to support temporary housing. The following is from Action #8 in the Strategy:

“Current codes will be expanded to allow non-profits or faith-based organizations to host small encampments, tiny home villages, or other types of monitored, supportive housing meant for temporary occupancy with social services available. There is a high need for supportive housing of all types, where case management and other services are available.”

The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, reviewed by the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council in 2016, contains a number of goals and policies related to the City’s response to homelessness (att. 1). The goals of the Housing Element include working cooperatively with local jurisdictions, nonprofits and religious organizations to reduce homelessness and find ways for providing emergency and transitional shelter to serve the population (Goal 6). The draft emergency housing regulations are consistent with this goal. Another goal is to strive for no net increase in the number of homeless people by focusing on proactive intervention (Goal 8). This is consistent with the direction established in the Affordable Housing Strategy which focuses on eliminating homelessness before it begins. Staff will review the applicable goals and policies specifically related to the emergency housing regulations at the July 2nd work session. DRAFT REGULATIONS: The draft emergency housing regulations would replace the City’s current homeless encampment regulations. The draft regulations are similar to other municipalities in the area to provide a level of consistency within the region. In the spring of 2018 the Planning Commission discussed potential updates to encampment regulations with a board member of the Eugene-based non-profit Community Supported Shelters. As a result of the discussion, the Planning Commission identified a number of issues that could potentially arise with the facilities and also discussed ways that these issues could be addressed. The draft emergency housing regulations were drafted to address the concerns that the Planning Commission identified at that time. The primary differences between current encampment regulations and the proposed emergency housing regulations include:

1. Addition of a definition section. 2. Allowing not only a church but also a non-profit or a unit of government to be able

to host a facility. These are defined in the code as a “host agency”. The support service provider for the facility is defined as the “sponsoring agency”.

3. Removal of requirements for a sponsoring agency to provide a plan for reporting transition results of residents out of emergency temporary housing into more long term permanent housing.

4. Addressing vehicle parking needs as well as allowing temporary overnight occupancy of vehicles as long as residents within the vehicles are subject to the same requirements as those within the emergency housing facility.

of 4

5. Changing timelines to allow possible extension of the initial one year approval timeline to add two additional 6 month periods (for a total of two years) with administrative approval. For those facilities that would be occupied longer than two years, approval of a conditional use permit would be required.

6. Not limiting the number of emergency housing facilities within the city at any one time.

7. Not limiting locations of emergency housing facilities from each other. 8. Not limiting locations of emergency housing facilities from sensitive land uses

(schools, daycares, etc.).

The draft regulations have been reviewed by city staff, department directors, and various outside stakeholders including a representative of Community Supported Shelters and neighboring jurisdictions. The comments and revisions received have been addressed in the attached draft. Further outreach has been conducted including engaging the Lacey Faith Leaders Forum at a meeting on March 14th to hear directly from those who may be interested in hosting a facility. The group supported removing the distance requirements from sensitive land uses (especially schools) as many churches are located close to schools and are already providing services to the homeless. They also recommended adding a suggestion that entry into an emergency housing facility be through a coordinated entry program. While the group was very supportive of the regulations, they were concerned that hosting a facility may be beyond the resources of an individual church. The group felt that they may be able to jointly host a facility and will continue discussions to pursue this as an option. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: At the Planning Commission briefing on March 5th, Commission members inquired about the requirements for warrant checks for potential residents. The concern was that those with low-level warrants may be discouraged from residing in the facility for fear of being incarcerated. The Planning Commission inquired about possibly amending the draft regulations to allow for those with low level warrants to reside in the facility. At the April 16th work session, staff presented the Planning Commission with the City Attorney’s position that supports the regulations as initially drafted. The City Attorney had concerns with any city regulations that would be counter to a judge’s order to report to court. As a result of the City Attorney’s guidance, the Planning Commission agreed to leave the warrant provisions unchanged Since the April 16th work session, Thurston County has proposed interim revisions to their emergency housing regulations in efforts to establish a mitigation site in the unincorporated Urban Growth Area near the intersection of Carpenter Road NE and Martin Way E. It is important to note that the draft regulations that have been developed by the City would not apply outside of the Lacey city limits, however, we would continue to work with Thurston County to ensure that their regulations are consistent with those adopted by the City of Lacey. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 21st. A significant amount of public comment was received both at the meeting and via e-mail. At the June 4th work session, the Planning Commission started discussing the comments and reached consensus to move forward with revising the draft regulations to address the following items:

1. Retain the requirement for identification as per the current adopted regulations

2. Retain the prohibition on alcohol as currently required

of 4

3. Amend the definition of “units of government”

4. Reword the section on results and reporting so that host agencies obtain statistics that

may aid in addressing some of the root causes of homelessness

5. Add language to require the review each site on an annual basis to ensure that social

service programs that are provided are effective

At the July 2 meeting, the Planning Commission will continue to review the comments received from the public hearing and discuss any amendments to the draft regulations as a result. Topics will include addressing the number of visitors to a site, number of residents, potential modifications of the term “emergency” housing to “temporary” housing, staffing requirements for sites, and notification procedures. Staff will develop a revised draft of the regulations based on the consensus reached by the Planning Commission on the various topics. At the conclusion of the work session, the Planning Commission is requested to schedule a second public hearing to take additional public testimony on the revised draft for August 6th.

Goal 6: Work cooperatively with local jurisdictions, nonprofits and religious organizations to reduce homelessness and find ways for providing emergency and transitional shelter to serve the identified needs of this population. Policy A: Based upon identified need, provision of facilities and services should be addressed by all local jurisdictions with fair share commitment reflected in local budgets. Policy B: Provide the opportunity to accommodate innovative strategies that will include emergency and transitional housing for the homeless population. Policy C: Ensure location and use of emergency and transitional housing considers, and is successfully integrated into, the surrounding neighborhood without impact to other land use activities. Policy D: Maintain and expand linkages with the business, religious and nonprofit communities as partners in ending homelessness. Policy E: An emphasis in City policy will be to reflect the Continuum of Care approach, which emphasizes supporting self-sufficiency and transitional housing programs rather than stop gap measures which fail to break the cycle of homelessness. Policy F: The City supports an increased role in meeting the problems of homelessness from the private sector through funds, in-kind, and volunteer support and will evaluate its funding decisions partially on the basis of other funding sources. The City will use its resources to leverage support for homeless services from the state and federal government and other funding sources. Policy G: As much as practical, consider the needs of the intended uses and site facilities to provide convenient access to the services the population will require. Policy H: Continue to review and monitor participation and experience in programs that support the homeless population, assess effectiveness in meeting the needs of Lacey’s homeless individuals, and provide opportunities for programs that can better serve this demographic. Policy I: Particular priority will be provision of services to minors without family resources and families with children. The City will place its highest priority on assisting homeless children and families with children and victims of domestic violence and other special needs groups. Policy J: As long as there is a demonstrated need for temporary transitional housing and the tent city program continues to operate in a fashion that is compatible with adjacent land uses, Lacey should consider continued support of the opportunity for local churches to administer to the homeless by hosting a tent city.

Goal 7: Identify and support a central contact to provide a help response for the homeless and citizens at risk of becoming homeless. Policy A: Support Lacey’s community partners in improving the community’s response to the needs of the homeless with identification of a referral point of contact for people to find services. This can include a service like the 211 referral line. Policy B: Support homeless persons or those at risk of becoming homeless by identifying referrals that can put people in contact with the organizations that provide the services that they need. Policy C: Make technical assistance documents available to citizens and jurisdictional staff on the 211 referral line and related social services so more people will be aware of community resources and where individuals can find help. Distribution of information to publicize the 211 services should include internet information, distribution at relevant community meetings, contact phone numbers, and informational flyers to community service and religious faith-based organizations. Policy D: Continue to take a regional perspective in addressing homelessness in the Thurston County community through support and participation in the Thurston County Home Consortium that provides coordinated planning, activities and evaluations that address homelessness. Policy E: As supported programs formulate future budgets or experience budget growth, promote a sharpened focus on addressing priority issues identified for Lacey’s homeless demographic. Policy F: As Lacey reviews programs asking for support through the Housing Consortium, support should be prioritized based upon a program reflecting the goals and priorities identified in this Housing Element. Goal 8: Strive for no net increase in the number of homeless people identified in future homeless census counts by focusing on proactive intervention. Policy A: Look for opportunities to strengthen outreach and engagement activities that will facilitate enrollment in treatment and service programs of individuals who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. Policy B: Promote programs designed to ensure that persons returning to the community from institutional or other sheltered settings (including foster care) do not become homeless. Policy C: Encourage the use of effective prevention interventions, ranging from family strengthening and high-risk youth programs to specific discharge planning.

Goal 9: Achieve maximum utilization of public buildings for use in the public interest by scheduling secondary uses and activities at times facilities are not being utilized for primary functions. Policy A: Review opportunities for shared use of public facilities where it will not conflict with primary use of the structure and associated activities. Policy B: When designing new public buildings and planning expansions of existing buildings, consider design to serve dual roles in providing a full range of public services, including emergency shelter, meal services, and other services that might be needed.

Lacey Municipal Code

Chapter 16.64 DRAFT 4.30.19

Page 1/6

The Lacey Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1529, passed April 26, 2018.

Chapter 16.64

EMERGENCY HOUSING FACILITIES (DRAFT)

Sections:

16.64.010 Definitions

16.64.015 Who may apply

16.64.020 Applicable procedures

16.64.030 Requirements for approval

16.64.040 Fire, safety, and health

16.64.050 Community and economic development director’s decision

16.64.060 Limitations

16.64.070 Revocation

16.64.080 Emergency shelters

16.64.090 Severability


A. "Emergency housing facility" means temporary emergency housing that may include tents, vehicles and small

structures not on a permanent foundation organized and managed as temporary accommodations for homeless

persons, and may be hosted by a faith-based organization, not-for-profit organization, or a unit of government.

For purposes of this section, a "not-for-profit" shall mean an organization duly incorporated in the State of

Washington and recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as an IRC 501 (c)(3) charitable organization.

B. "Host agency" means a faith-based organization, or a not-for-profit organization, or a unit of government which

owns or controls the property or has an ownership interest in the property that is the subject of an application for an

Emergency Housing Facility Permit for providing basic services and support to temporary emergency housing

facility residents, such as hot meals and coordination of other needed donations and services.

Ownership interest shall include an interest by recorded title or by fully executed lease of the subject property.

C. "Sponsoring agency" means the host agency or another agency that assists the host agency and that joins in an

application with a host agency for an emergency housing facility permit and assumes responsibility for providing

basic services and support to emergency housing facility residents, such as hot meals, social services, sanitation,

hygiene, storage of belongings, trash and refuse collection, and coordination of other needed donations and services.

D. “Temporary” means lasting for only a limited period of time; not permanent.

16.64.015 Who may apply.

Emergency housing facilities shall be permitted only as an accommodation of a faith-based organization by a host

agency and sponsoring agency, or by a unit of government, or by a not-for-profit organization. Each host agency and

sponsoring agency shall jointly apply for a permit under this section and shall certify compliance with all applicable

requirements for approval and conditions of this chapter and the application. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346

§1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §5, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.020 Applicable procedures.

An emergency housing facility permit is an administrative determination as identified in Section 1C.030 (Limited

Administrative Review) of the City of Lacey Development Guidelines and Public Works Standards. In addition to

the requirements for administrative determinations found in Section 1C.030 of the Development Guidelines and

Public Works Standards the following additional procedures apply:

A. Advance Notice Required. The host agency and sponsoring agency shall notify the city of the proposed

emergency housing facility a minimum of thirty days in advance of the proposed date of establishment for the

emergency housing facility. The advance notification shall contain the following information:

1. The date the emergency housing facility intends to begin operation;



Page 2/6


2. The length of time expected for operation;

3. The maximum number of residents proposed;

4. The host location;

5. Host and sponsoring agency names; and

6. The manner in which the emergency housing facility will comply with the requirements of this chapter.

B. Public Meeting Required. The host agency and/or sponsoring agency shall conduct at least one public

information meeting within or as close as possible to the location where the proposed emergency housing facility

will be located. The meeting shall be held a minimum of fourteen days prior to the issuance of the administrative

approval. The time and location of the meeting shall be agreed upon between the city and host agency and/or

sponsoring agency. All property owners within five hundred feet of the proposed emergency housing facility site

shall be notified by mail by the host agency and/or sponsoring agency a minimum of fourteen days in advance of the

meeting. In lieu of notice by mail, an alternative means of notice may be provided that is reasonably calculated to

notify the neighboring property owners within five hundred feet of the facility.

C. Signs Required. The applicant shall also provide notice of the application by posting two signs or placards on

the site, or in a location immediately adjacent to the site, that provide visibility to motorists using adjacent streets.

Timing for placing signs shall coincide with other notification requirements described above. The director of

community and economic development shall establish standards for size, color, layout, design, placement, and

timing of installation and removal of the signs or placards.

16.64.030 Criteria/requirements for approval.

The community and economic development director or designee may issue a temporary and revocable permit for a

emergency housing facility subject to the following criteria and requirements:

A. Site Criteria.

1. Ownership. The host agency shall submit documentation that it owns or has a leasehold interest in the

subject property;

2. Size. The property must be sufficient in size to accommodate the residents and must have necessary on-

site facilities including but not limited to the following:

a. Sanitary toilets in the number required to meet capacity guidelines located such that no odors shall

be detectable from exterior property lines;

b. Hand washing facilities by the toilets and by any food areas;

c. Refuse receptacles; and

d. Lockable storage of personal belongings.

3. Water Source. The host agency shall provide an adequate water source to the emergency housing facility

as approved by the city.

4. Sensitive Areas. No emergency housing facility shall be located within a sensitive or critical area or its

buffer as defined under LMC Title 14.

5. Limitation on Residents. No more than forty residents shall be allowed. The city may further limit the

number of residents as site conditions dictate.

6. Parking. Adequate on-site parking shall be provided for the emergency housing facility. No off-site

parking will be allowed. The estimated number of vehicles used by the emergency housing facility residents

shall be provided in the permit application. If the emergency housing facility is located on a site with another



Page 3/6


use, it shall be shown that the emergency housing facility will not create a shortage of on-site parking for the

other use(s) on the property. A host agency or sponsoring agency may allow overnight occupancy of vehicles.

Residents within vehicles are subject to the same requirements of this chapter as those located within the

emergency housing facility.

7. Public Transportation. The emergency housing facility shall be located within a quarter mile of a bus stop

with service seven days per week. If not located within a quarter mile of a bus stop, the host agency or

sponsoring agency must demonstrate the ability for residents to obtain access to the nearest public

transportation stop (such as carpools or shuttle buses).

8. Screening. The emergency housing facility shall be adequately buffered and screened to be site obscuring

from adjacent right-of-way and residential properties. Screening shall be a minimum height of six feet and may

include, but is not limited to, a combination of fencing, landscaping, or the placement of the emergency

housing facility behind buildings. The type of screening shall be approved by the city.

9. Privacy for Sanitary Facilities. All sanitary portable toilets shall be screened from adjacent properties and

rights-of-way. The type of screening shall be approved by the city and may include, but is not limited to, a

combination of fencing and/or landscaping.B. Security.

1. Operations and Security Plan. An operations and security plan for the emergency housing facility shall be

submitted to the city at the time of application. The security plan shall address potential security and

neighborhood impacts within five hundred feet of the emergency housing facility site.

2. Code of Conduct. The host agency shall ensure that the emergency housing facility has a code of conduct

to be enforced by the host agency which, at a minimum, prohibits illegal drugs, weapons, violence, littering on

the emergency housing facility site or in the surrounding neighborhood, noise in excess of the limits set forth in

LMC 16.57.030, and open fires. The code of conduct should also address any other issues related to camp and

neighborhood safety. A copy of the code of conduct shall be submitted to the city at the time of application.

3. In addition to the above standards, the host agency or sponsoring agency may adopt and enforce

additional code of conduct conditions not otherwise inconsistent with this section.

4. Sign Agreement. All emergency housing facility residents must sign an agreement to abide by the code

of conduct. Failure to do so shall result in the noncompliant resident’s immediate and permanent expulsion from

the property.

5. Log. The host or sponsoring agency shall keep a log of all persons who stay overnight in the emergency

housing facility. The log shall include names, birth dates, and dates of stay. Logs shall be retained a minimum

of one year.

6. Identification. The host or sponsoring agency shall take all reasonable and legal steps to obtain verifiable

government-issued photo identification of prospective and current emergency housing facility residents.

7. Warrant and Sex Offender Status Check. The host or sponsoring agency shall engage the Lacey police

department to use the photo identification to check for outstanding in-state and out-of-state warrants and

registered sex offender status.

a. Outstanding Warrants. If said warrant check reveals an existing or outstanding warrant from any

jurisdiction in the United States, the host or sponsoring agency may reject the subject of the check for

residency in the emergency housing facility or may eject the subject of the check if that person is already an

emergency housing facility resident and will immediately report the finding to the Lacey police department.

b. Sex Offender Status. If the check reveals the applicant to be a registered sex offender required to

register with the County Sheriff or their county of residence pursuant to RCW 9A.44.130, the host or

sponsoring agency may reject the subject of the check for residency in the emergency housing facility or

may eject the subject of the check if that person is already an emergency housing facility resident and will

immediately report the finding to the Lacey police department.



Page 4/6


C. Security. The host or sponsoring agency shall ensure the emergency housing facility is secure and managed to

strictly prohibit illegal drugs, weapons, fighting, abuse of any kind, littering, or disturbing the neighbors while

located on the property.

D. Entrance/Host Tent. The host or sponsoring agency shall ensure there is an entrance/host tent that is manned

twenty-four hours a day seven days a week. The host or sponsoring agency will appoint a designated “on duty”

emergency housing facility manager at all times. Said representative shall also serve as a point of contact for the

Lacey police department, and will orient the department on how the entrance operates. The names of the on-duty

representative will be posted daily at the entrance. The city shall provide contact numbers of nonemergency

personnel which shall be posted at the entrance.

E. Visitors. Visitors to the emergency housing facility must meet the following procedures and requirements:

1. Visitors to the emergency housing facility must be invited by a resident, host agency, or sponsoring

agency and must be able to show picture ID.

2. Visitors must be accompanied by the resident that invited the visitor while at the emergency housing

facility.

3. Visitors may be at the emergency housing facility only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.

4. Visitors may not stay overnight unless they get permission from the host and complete the same

background check requirements as required for residents.

F. Age Restrictions. Residents of the emergency housing facility must be at least eighteen years of age. No

minors are permitted entrance to the emergency housing facility unless they are related to a camp resident. Minors

related to a resident may visit the emergency housing facility during the day. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346

§1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §8, 2009.)

G. Entry program. Residents of the emergency housing facility should be placed through a coordinated entry

program.

16.64.040 Fire, safety, and health.

The emergency housing facility shall meet the following fire, safety, and health requirements:

A. Fire Safety. The emergency housing facility shall conform to the following requirements:

1. Open Fires. Open fires are prohibited. All fires shall adhere to the regulations of the Olympic Region

Clean Air Agency;

2. Heating Appliances. No heating appliances within individual units are allowed unless approved by the

building official;

3. Cooking. A common tent may provide community cooking facilities and services for the camp, but only

if approved by the host agency and the health department. No cooking appliances are allowed within individual

tents of residents;

4. Fire Extinguishers. An adequate number and appropriate rating of fire extinguishers shall be provided as

approved by the fire department;

5. Emergency Access. Adequate access for the fire and emergency medical apparatus shall be provided.

This shall be determined by the fire marshal;

6. Separation. Adequate separation between tents and other structures shall be maintained as determined by

the fire marshal; and

7. Electrical Service. Electrical service shall be in accordance with recognized and accepted practice.

Electrical cords are not to be strung together and any cords used must be approved for exterior use.



Page 5/6


B. Health. All necessary sanitary facilities including temporary sanitary portable toilets and facilities for hand

washing shall be provided. All applicable health standards for providing and using such facilities shall be satisfied as

required by the health department.

C. Access for Inspections. The host agency shall permit inspections by city staff and the Thurston County health

department to ensure compliance with the conditions of this permit. Inspections shall occur at reasonable times, and

may occur without prior notice. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §9, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5,

2008).

D. Accommodating the Emergency Housing Facility Indoors. In cases where the host or sponsoring agency

determine it is practical or necessary to accommodate the facility inside existing structures, the host or sponsoring

agency shall have the option of making such a request to the city. Upon receiving a request to host the facility inside

of existing buildings, the community and economic development director or designee may issue a temporary and

revocable permit for an indoor emergency housing facility subject to the following criteria and requirements:

1. Compliance with Building Codes. An indoor emergency housing facility shall comply with the

requirements of the city’s building codes. However, pursuant to RCW 19.27.042, the building official shall have the

authority to exempt code deficiencies so long as such deficiencies pose no threat to human life, health, or safety.

2. Building Criteria. The buildings proposed for use shall be of sufficient size to accommodate the residents

and must have necessary on-site facilities including but not limited to the following:

a. Adequate water supply;

b. Sanitary toilets in the number required to meet capacity guidelines;

c. Hand washing facilities by the toilets and food areas;

d. Refuse receptacles; and

e. Kitchen facilities for food preparation;

f. All applicable health standards for providing and using such facilities shall be satisfied as required by

the health department. (Ord. 1410 §§1 (part), 3, 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1327 §1, 2009; Ord. 1326 §7, 2009;

Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.050 Community and economic development director’s decision.

The community and economic development director shall review the proposal for compliance with the provisions of

this chapter and all other applicable law. Said review shall ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the citizens

of the city are preserved, and shall provide an expedient and reasonable land use review process for decisions and

interpretations of this chapter. The director may modify the submittal requirement as deemed appropriate. The

director shall notify the host agency and sponsoring agency of his or her decision to approve, modify, or deny the

application within a timely manner, but not prior to fourteen days after the public meeting. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part),

2013: Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.060 Limitations.

A. Duration. Duration of the emergency housing facility shall not exceed one year and may be extended for two

additional six-month extensions upon submittal of an application and proof that the site did not have on-site criminal

violations greater than the crime rate of the surrounding neighborhood. The site may be approved for a duration

longer than two years upon approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to LMC 16.66.

B. Parcel Limitation. No host agency shall host an emergency housing facility more than one time in any twenty-

four-month period, beginning on the date the emergency housing facility locates on a parcel of property.

16.64.070 Revocation.

A. If the host agency or sponsoring agency fails to take action against a resident who violates the terms and

conditions of the permit, it may result in immediate termination of the permit issued to the host agency or

sponsoring agency. If the City learns of acts of violence by residents of the emergency housing facility and the



Page 6/6


Host Agency or Sponsoring Agency has not adequately addressed the situation to protect residents, the permit may

be immediately terminated.

B. Upon determination that that has been a violation of any approval criteria or condition of application, the

director of community and economic development may give written notice to the permit holder describing the

alleged violation. Within fourteen days of the mailing of notice of violation, the permit holder shall show cause why

the permit shall not be revoked. At the end of the fourteen-day period, the director shall sustain or revoke the permit.

When an emergency housing facility permit is revoked, the director shall notify the permit holder by certified mail

of the revocation and the findings upon which the revocation is based. Appeals of decisions to revoke an emergency

housing facility permit shall be to Thurston County Superior Court. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010;

Ord. 1326 §11, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.080 Emergency shelters.

The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to emergency or cold weather shelters where the screening of

individuals to be temporarily housed in such shelters is conducted by an emergency shelter network or a religious

organization providing the emergency shelter. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §12, 2009;

Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.090 Severability.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or other portion of this chapter, or its application to any person,

is for any reason declared invalid in whole or in part by any court or agency of competent jurisdiction, said decision

shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. (Ord. 1410 §5, 2013).

Additional associated amendments:

Repeal: LMC 16.06.375: Host Agency definition

LMC 16.06.372: Homeless Encampment definition

Amend: LMC 16.06.676: Religious Organization definition

16.06.676 Religious organization.

“Religious organization” means organizations and institutions developed for the purposes of religious exercise and considered

protected under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Particularly relevant in the context of the

ordinance codified in this section is a religious organization whose religious activities and beliefs typically include providing

basic needs such as emergency housing, shelters, meals, and assistance to the poor and needy. (Ord. 1539 §53, 2019: Ord. 691

§6, 1984).

1

Ryan Andrews

From: franco.caiafa <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 11:18 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless

I am against the proposal to expand the groups. I work in Seattle on nights and see the effect that this has on the city, also the problem in Olympia, which deters us from visiting due to the problem. This will also have an effect on our home values which in turn will affect the taxes we pay. I live in Lacey in the Stonegate Development just off 45th and college st. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device

1

Ryan Andrews

From: K Cunningham <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:33 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Emergency housing

I am a Homeowner in lacey and DO NOT support any form of outdoor housing tents for the homeless. Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Karen Castillo <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:05 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Expanding homeless camps

No expansion, please! Don’t let Lacey become like Seattle or Olympia. More “homeless” people will just keep coming if we keep making room for them. This is ridiculous. Maybe I should sell my house now before my property values begin to tank as a result of such an expansion. Mental health treatment and better law enforcement re drugs is what is needed. Karen Castillo Citizen and registered voter in Lacey Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Lisa Brining <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 12:19 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Expansion of Emergency Housing

As with anything expansion of allowances should be preceded with an awareness that equal laws apply and also their enforcement. Citizens may hold governments accountable for the equal application of laws ot they could be deemed to be enacting contributory negligence. It is my expectatiin that all thr solid waste and littering laws be upheld equally at any facility allowed to provide emergency housing just as equal as any single residence. Enforcement and application will be minitored by the citizens of Lacey. Any disregard for Solid Waste and littering laws can be followed with Class Action lawsuits from their citizens. It is the Cities FIRST resposibility to protect human health! Similar lawsuits have been filed by environmental advocacy non‐profit groups. You can do the research.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Lori Richardson <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 12:57 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless - NO

I vote NO to allowing various groups of people to build homeless camps. I pay a fortune in property taxes but I never complain. I don’t want my property values dropping because a neighbor thinks it’s a good idea to allow a group of homeless to set up camp on his lot. I believe in helping people who help themselves. I do not believe in coddling these folks who are capable of working but choose to beg instead. I believe many homeless are mentally ill and they should certainly be identified and treated. The others need to be working at one of the THOUSANDS of businesses that are begging for help. Lori Richardson

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Troy Kurtenbach <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:59 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless

Sent from Troy ‘s IPhone. Please DO NOT!!! turn Lacey into another shit hole!!

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jackie <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 10:39 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Encampment proposal

Please use some common sense and do no turn Lacey and surrounding area into another downtown Olympia by changing the current regulations that allow only churches to host homeless encampments. Why would any elected official even consider a yes vote on such a proposal? You’ve been entrusted with the public’s trust. Do not abuse that trust! Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: David Vess <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:31 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Encampments

Please do not allow this to happen in Thurston county. Thank you, David Vess Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Andrew Kroschel <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:05 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless encampments in Lacey

Hello, I am writing to express my support for measures that curb rather than expand homeless encampment venues, as well as overnight parking. I understand that something similar is being proposed to greatly increase the potential for homeless encampments this evening. I understand this is a struggle, not just in our city, but in the state and nation at large. However, as a council, you are our first line of defense in making sure our city stays safe. More so than even law enforcement, you have the ability to set the overall direction of our city for years to come! So, as someone who feels compassion for those less fortunate, but also wants a safe and prosperous environment for myself and my family, I implore you to reconsider this measure and use the example of a city like Marysville in the search for a solution. Thank you, Andrew Kroschel 360‐584‐3336

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Sandra <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 10:35 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless encampments

We DO NOT want homeless encampments expanded beyond the current churches! We do not want to become Seattle! No homeless! Sandra Williams and Maxine Thorstad Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jean Archer <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:03 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless hearing

Please don’t expand homeless encampments. I served many years on a Human Services Commission in King County. It is a proven fact that the more services that are offered attracts more people. This results in Lacey carrying a disproportionate share of the load. I hope you saw the KOMO special, SEATTLE IS DYING. Please don’t substitute Lacey in place of Seattle. Housing isn’t the problem, drugs are the problem. This means exposing our citizens to disease, etc. Thank you for your consideration. Jean Archer 5498 Park Pl. Lp. SE LACEY, WA. Sent from my iPad Each and every day is a blessing

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Freddy Adams <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 12:25 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless encampments

To whom it may concern, I want to make it clear that many of us wish for the homeless encampments to be limited. This issue prevents many of us from enjoying our own city. I refuse to expose my loved ones to a group of people that have nothing to lose with a bad decision. We maintain all of the risk in such an arrangement. This situation is unacceptable. I am not in favor of criminalizing the homeless. I do understand we need a solution for them, and their betterment. However, I do not believe that expanding homeless encampments is the right answer as it increases our risk and limitations. Thank you for your time. Frederick Adams

1

Ryan Andrews

From: LPMc <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 8:19 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless in Lacey

Dear Mr. Andrews, The Olympian reports: "Under the proposed changes, nonprofits or a unit of government also would be able to host encampments, Andrews said.

The proposed changes would establish standards for public health and safety, sanitation and timelines for approval, he said.

“It opens it up to others to host an encampment,” he said.

The type of homeless encampment to be hosted could be tents, tiny homes or a place where people could sleep in their vehicles, Andrews said."

You are suggesting that Lacey follow the same failed short-term solution that Seattle and Olympia have been trying.

People with problems so serious that they can't work need us to help them with those problems by providing mental health facilities they can stay at until they can function. We need to provide more drug rehab that they can stay in until they're clean and sober. We need to provide childcare so that mothers can work. Those are the compassionate answers because they'll work long term. The short-sighted fix of putting people in housing in any condition and calling it good is a failure in Seattle, Olympia, and will be in Lacey. Help them get well instead of just putting them out of sight in housing they'll just lose again.

Leslie McClure

Lacey, WA

1

Ryan Andrews

From: BRUCE REID <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:06 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless incampments

NO!!! The more you give the more they take. Lacey will become another Seattle. Tough love is best !!! Just say No!! Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: CHERYL AHERN <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 6:50 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Lacey council proposal

Hello, I do not live within the Lacey city limits. However my wife and I do own 16 apartments within the city. We understand that the city of Lacey is proposing to expand the list of organizations that can provide areas for the homeless population to live. The council must be aware that if they make it easy for homeless people to live within the city limits we will get a larger homeless population. This will lower the taxpayer and local voters excellent quality of life here in Lacey, one only has to go downtown Olympia or Seattle to see the degredation of life caused by homeless allowed free reign to wander about the city. Please enact an ordinance that discourages homeless people, do not encourage them to live here. Thank you. Mark Ahern 360‐701‐5554 Sent from Xfinity Connect Application

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Eric G Fox <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 8:13 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless

Move them to Evergreen College or ship them to a FEMA camp. They think rules don’t apply to them, but even being homeless has rules. There are jobs for anyone willing to work. We cannot continue to enable people. Sincerely, Eric G Fox

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Kari Husman <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:26 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Question for tonight’s meeting on homeless camps

Will there be any regulation of drugs and crime and there’s expanded areas for permissions to house homeless and cabinets? Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Judy Kennedy <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 10:55 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey Homeless Camp Ordinance

As a Lacey resident I support revising the city ordinance on homeless camps, to broaden the opportunities to shelter homeless citizens. We know homelessness is a regional crisis primarily due to a lack of affordable housing. It's no use pushing the problem off on Olympia. I would hope such camps would be supervised or self‐governed, and would provide "coordinated entry" into services that lead to housing solutions. I would also like to know if Lacey has made a concerted effort to inform churches of the current ordinance that would allow them to establish camps and housing for the homeless. Beyond this particular ordinance, I would like to see the city contribute funds to complete the new food bank on Martin Way. The food bank not only helps the homeless, it helps those who are housed and struggling to afford rent, preventing homelessness. We need affordable housing and the new full‐service food bank more than we need a new railroad museum. Judith Kennedy 3928 14th Ave. SE Lacey 98503

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Dan White <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 11:00 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey Homeless Encampments

Council, I wish there were some way to help, but, from my experience living in places with large homeless populations (Seattle, Oahu, various parts of CA, etc.), is that most that are homeless do not want or seek help because they don’t traditionally like to play by / follow society’s rules (work, pay rent, taxes, etc) and therefore choose to be homeless (again, not all, but most I’ve encountered). Curious why when I go to a state park, I have to pay camping fees, park fees, etc. to pitch a tent OTHERWISE, I could be fined and face penalties. YET, someone who is homeless can pitch a tent wherever they want and face no legal ramifications! I, even though it does hurt my heart, believe the encampments (property, not people) should be treated like city trash, rounded up, and taken to the dump! The council should always remember, the more we (society) ENABLE people and take care of their problems for them... the less interested they are in helping themselves!!! Respectfully, Dan & Tanya White [email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: David J. Albaugh <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 2:27 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey Homeless

Absolutely nobody wants homeless encampments in Lacey. If you want to help, offer bus services to take the homeless to the several hundred establishments in the city that are hiring workers. These so called homeless you speak of are lazy useless leaches. I look forward to attending the meeting tomorrow night. Just last night here in Thurston county, a "homeless" person was shot in the chest when he broke into a family home and refused to leave. These "homeless" people are able bodied, mostly young lazy people that are addicted to drugs and have no desire to contribute to society. Most should be in Jail. Providing them with drugs, needles, housing and food only enables their way of life. They are animals. David J. Albaugh

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Rivera, Andrew CIV USARMY ID-READINESS (USA) <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:29 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey

Importance: High

Good morning, As much as I feel for the homeless and the challenges they face, authorizing more homeless encampment areas in Lacey is not the way to go. My family and I have lived here for 21 years and love the area we call home. The council and politicians should listen to the people who want to preserve the beauty of our city without adding additional homeless encampments. What should be done is offer more resources and assistance to these homeless people, with the hope and idea to make their lives better. Find them a job, create low cost housing, offer drug abuse assistance and more. Putting up more homeless encampments is not the answer! This is just a bandaid and not a solution. Thanks for your time and let's keep Lacey looking beautiful. Sincerely, Mr. Rivera Range support branch, JBLM‐Main, WA A retired, disabled Army veteran who calls Lacey home.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Heather Byington <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 1:10 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: No expanded areas for homeless housing

Please do not expand areas for homeless housing. Seattle is dying, due to this issue. Let’s not follow their lead. We need to provide more drug rehabilitation resources, not expand areas for housing. Heather Byington Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Deborah Sumner <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 12:39 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless encampments

Hello, I oppose the homeless encampments proposal. I say to look at the impact on the whole community. Homelessness is a difficult situation as I know I do not want to to unsafe in my neighborhood nor my home values to drop. Or do I want people to be homeless and hurting. How can we be compassionate as a community and bring that community up so they have a roof over their head, food and find a sense of confidence and safety they have never had before and not have a impact on the community who feels safe and is relying on the equity building on their homes and creating a live in integrity. One does not have to have an impact at the the impact of another. Sent from my iPhone Debbie Sumner Vice President The Travel Group Life long connections, love, adventure and health. **Love spending time with your dog and want to go to “Dog inclusive adventures, businesses”? Contact m phone: (714)‐235‐9823 email: [email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Katrina Szabo <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 11:38 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Proposal for homeless encampments in Lacey

Dear Ryan, I am a newer home owner in the Lacey area and would like to write in with concerns about the proposal for homeless encampments. It has been so hard to watch the decline of downtown Olympia over the past year. Please make my concern heard that this is not a good proposal to designate areas where homeless can set up camp, tine homes or park their cars. The homeless population has become so large they are destroying our wooded areas, bringing in large amounts of garbage that we are responsible to dispose of it, some homeless people have mental illness and create public disturbances which entails the police being called to control them, arrest them, house them etc. . . . who pays for that the tax payers do. You know what Olympia looks like so I don't need to go any farther. I love Lacey and want it to continue to be a beautiful and safe place to live. Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns, have a good day. Regards, Katrina Szabo

1

Ryan Andrews

From: CLAUDIA BARBERI <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 10:30 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Proposed Changes to City's Existing Emergency Housing Facility Regulations

To Who It May Concern:

I am a resident of the City of Lacey and a property tax payer.

I do want any changes made to the City's existing emergency housing facility regulations. The proposed changes being discussed will only gravely damage our city. Allowing tents, tiny houses, and people to sleep in vehicles is the wrong answer. What we should be doing is making our city LESS desirable for the homeless, not encouraging them to come here. We need more services for the mentally ill and drug rehabilitation. We need to put a stop to the root causes of homelessness, not encouraging it to continue and flourish!

Please...the expansion of homeless encampments is not the answer. We need to get people off the streets, not make room for more on the streets!

Claudia Barberi

(360) 485-2115

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Shelley Chisholm <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 3:31 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Public Hearing on Homelessness

Good afternoon‐ Just a few comments for the meeting, unfortunately, I will not be able to attend. Has the City adopted a successful and proven model to determine best practices, prior to resources being committed? If so, which model? Yes, there is a problem with homelessness, and I agree with Mr Gary Edwards, homeless need to be held accountable for their actions, including breaking the law. Need to triage the situation, mental, drugs, actually homeless, don't want to work (chosen lifestyle). Are they chronic or non chronic homeless? Then move to appropriate program. What precipitated the requirement to change the City’s emergency housing requirements? Has the homeless population grown to the point where the church properties are unable to support? If so, by how much? Any idea what happened to the old Thurston County jail? (Would require rebranding). Would be perfect, temporary solution. Dispensary, rooms, bathrooms, showers, dining facing, laundry facilities. Would be able to set up “one stop shopping”, for organizations to assist. Residents would have an assigned case manager to facilitate self reliance. Also, there are a lot of faith based organizations that will help. If the old jail is unavailable, would ask the City to work in conjunction with County on other consolidated options. One stop shopping, model for resources. Does Washington state have a model program? Would ask the Council to review best practices, before making any decisions. Thank you for your time, Shelley Chisholm Sent from my iPad

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jason Hughes <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:17 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Question about tonight's quorum

Do you have any information about the meeting for homeless shelters? What is the plan to expand to? How far will it go in this decision? Next Seattle or allowing it to go outside of churches? What is the end game and how does it get prevented from growing our little town into a larger trash heap? Thank you, Jason Hughes

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jim Karla Stanton <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:31 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: RE: Homeless Code Changes Hearing Question

I would hope the county’s rules are compatible with Lacey and the all other jurisdictions in the county… My question is a little more pointed to those county properties that are located within the Urban Growth Boundaries of a city… Does or will Lacey have any input or control over selection and the running of a homeless camp on county property within the Lacey UGB… Could or should Lacey and the other cities fight to put some control language into the new county regulations that gives some level of input and agreement requirements with a city be followed before the county could site a camp within an UGB of a city? Something more than just an unwritten “gentleman’s agreement” to do so… And should the new Lacey regulations have some corresponding control language as well? I am in support of some type of camp(s) being located in Lacey and the Lacey UGB… I just think Lacey should have some control in what form that takes and how sites are managed, even within the Lacey UGB, not just limited to the City limits… I even think the site mentioned would be a highly reasonable selection… My concern is that Lacey and the Lacey City Council aren’t going to have some level of control over site selection or management… Lacey needs to be seen as leading or in control in some way rather than the county just plunking down a site, maybe at the request of Olympia… Thanks for taking my input, js

From: Ryan Andrews <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 9:14 AM To: Jim Karla Stanton <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Homeless Code Changes Hearing Question Hi Jim. Thank you for your comments. They will be provided to the Lacey Planning Commission at their hearing on May 21st. To answer your question, these proposed regulations would only apply within the Lacey city limits. It is our hope that any regulations that the county adopts for the urban growth area would be compatible and consistent with the City’s regulations. Thanks, Ryan Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager City of Lacey Community and Economic Development 420 College St. SE Lacey, WA 98503 (360) 412‐3190 [email protected]

From: Jim Karla Stanton [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 8:26 AM

2

To: Ryan Andrews <[email protected]> Subject: Homeless Code Changes Hearing Question Hey Ryan, My question for the hearing would be: What effect will the proposed Lacey homeless code changes have, if any, on the county’s proposal to use the “county property” near Martin Way and Carpenter Rd as a homeless camp? What control does the City of Lacey have over use of county properties within the Lacey UGB? While the county commissioners are contemplating similar changes to county code to allow homeless camps on county property, changes that specifically mention Lacey, there are no words in that proposal that indicate Lacey has or will have any sway or control over the county placing such a camp site within the Lacey UGB. Jim Stanton

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Fred Olympiawa <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 10:27 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: tonights city council meeting about encampments

Do not turn Lacey into another Seattle. Please vote NO to anything allowing homeless encampments. Please watch "Seattle is Dying" we do not need a "Lacey is Dying" story. Fred Fuelberg

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Karen Oelschlager <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:33 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Tonight's meeting about homeless camps

Dear Mr./Ms. Andrews: I understand that the city council is holding a meeting tonight to address changes to regulations concerning homeless camps within city limits. While I have compassion for people who are homeless through no fault of their own, I believe the council needs to consider this issue very carefully. Consider what the expansion of homeless camps in downtown Olympia created. Businesses in that area are closing their doors and moving due to frustrations with cleaning trash and feces from their doorsteps due to the increase in the presence of homeless due to the camps. If the City of Lacey decides to expand areas where the homeless may reside, it should also commit to the cost of cleanup at these areas or at the least, providing trash and septic services for these people AND not impose taxes on the citizens of Lacey to pay for those services. If the Council decides to do so, it should figure out ways to pay for cleanup of those areas out of current budgets and not lay it on the backs of its citizens. Frankly, the best would be to put this issue to a vote of the citizens of Lacey. We should have a voice in issues that could have a huge impact on our lives. Thank you for listening. Karen Oelschlager

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Don Archer <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 1:05 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Vote NO

As long as government GIVES and does , problem will ONLY grow. With growth it becomes insurmountable!! And the general population pays and Loses. History past and present PROVES this. Sent from my iPad

May 21, 2019

City of Lacey Dept of Community & Economic Development 420 College ST SE Lacey, WA 98503

Dear Mr.Andrews,

We are providing comments on the proposed changes to the city code that would establish a permitting process and standards for temporary emergency housing for the homeless in the City of Lacey. Our building is a 40,000 sq.ft commercial building located at 975 Carpenter RD NE in Lacey. We built in 2006 and have occupied the building since then. We currently rent out about 30,000 sq.ft of office space to 15 tenant businesses. The businesses include a membership association, law firm, third party industrial insurance consultants, medical consulting services, real estate, software development, and a church.

Our staff combined with the other tenants have approximately 80 professionals that access the building regularly Monday through Friday during the hours of 8AM to 6PM. On certain occasions, we have additional business professionals such as government agencies using our meeting spaces, which can take that number up to 150 or more on any given day of the week. During weekday evening hours and on the weekends, there is a church that has a congregation of adults, teenagers, and young children that use the building for their programs and services.

Since occupying the building in 2006, we have had frequent issues with transient individuals accessing our building to use restrooms, drinking water facilities, and wandering the professional business offices and grounds. We routinely find people not connected with the building sleeping under our covered loading dock. Recently, we had someone attempt to break into some enclosed trailers and they caused damage to the trailer door hitches. Several times per year, we are in contact with the Lacey Police Department to assist us with issues of transients in our parking lot and building dumping trash, consuming drugs and alcohol, and accessing our private building.

We have experienced issues with transients in our area, even without an approved homeless mitigation site in existence on Carpenter Road. We routinely observe transients coming onto our property from the Woodland Reserve area which is west of our building and from across Carpenter Road just west of our building. We are very concerned that if a homeless mitigation site is allowed on Carpenter RD NE, that this will further increase the amount of foot traffic that comes through our property, placing adults and young children at risk of crime and other dangers and harassment.

We believe it is a paramount duty of the City of Lacey and Thurston County to ensure we have a safe environment for all the renters and members of the public who visit our facilities daily. We believe a homeless mitigation site will jeopardize our safety and the safety of the other business and homes in the area.

To summarize, we are adamantly opposed to any homeless mitigation sites being approved within Lacey City limits or in Thurston County for that matter. The problem is not necessarily that these people do not have a place to go, but rather, there is a criminal element that is not being dealt with by our government officials. The City Council needs to empower the Lacey Police Department to apprehend individuals committing crimes such as theft, drug abuse, loitering, and destruction of property so that a safe and secure atmosphere is maintained.

Thank you for entering our statement into the record on this matter.

Sincerely,

John Stuhlmiller

CEO

Washington Farm Bureau

NPO (2/08)

NPO-CL-2.1 (Continued)

3

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Debby Carr <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:13 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless in Lacey

Our household has two senior registered voters and we would vote against any increased opportunity for homeless in our city of Lacey. It is often the case that they are homeless due to mental health or drugs. Other cities are suffering because they opened the doors and are inundated with homeless camps that bring costs for clean up, crimes, and increase drugs. It would be a huge cost to our city and would bring down the quality of our neighborhoods. Please keep Lacey a desirable place to live. Debby and Terry Carr Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: scouthobby <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 9:57 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: As a longtime homeowner in Lacey the last thing I ever want to see

is Lacey turn into another Olympia, Seattle or California (as homeless apply). Those cities have bowed to the homeless and their never ending drain on those in real need. Vote smart and keep Lacey a beautiful and vibrant city. Thank you. Jim Ratcliff Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Todd Rose <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 1:18 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: changes to the city's existing emergency housing facility regulations

Mr. Andrews, I just learned of this meeting, and, while I'd like to attend and voice my opinion on the matter, I find I am unable to tonight. However I'd like to give you my brief 2 cents worth, if you don't mind. We are a very compassionate and giving family, we take care of our own. We've found Laceyites, to be very compassionate people who take care of their own too. When it comes to homelessness, People of Lacey will in fact take care of their own; in other words, if you are homeless in Lacey, from lacey, we as a community will care for you in the way of housing, drug and alcohol treatment, jobs etc. But Lacey should not be taking in people who have worn out their welcome in other areas around the region. My saying these days is: You can be homeless in Lacey, if your homeless from Lacey, we will help you. If your a homeless from outside Thurston County, we should help that person get back home. I know first hand how easy it is to become homeless. Our daughter lost her job living paycheck to paycheck. We stepped in to help her out until she got a new job, caught up on her bills and back on her feet. We take care of our own, in the same way Lacey can care for less fortunate from Lacey. The concern I have is opening up public, park, and, private lands for homeless encampments with no plan to care for the homeless from other areas who end up here. Unless there is a plan for that, we run the risk of becoming a mini Seattle or Portland. Thank you for taking the time to read my opinion. Todd Rose 9616 Piperhill DR SE Olympia WA. 98513 (360)688‐9282

1

Ryan Andrews

From: [email protected]: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 4:09 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Comments on Homelessness

I appreciate the opportunity to comment by email. I hope that the city of Lacey will approve changes that will allow the compassionate housing of people who do not have homes. As we know, people are homeless for many different reasons, and multiple ways of responding are needed. In addition, lack of housing is a regional problem. I am glad that Lacey is recognizing that fact. I shop and do business in Lacey, and would be happy to know that the city is providing safe places for people without resources to stay until they might be able find more permanent housing. Nancy Snyder 5220 Puget Rd NE Thurston County

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Angie Hong <[email protected]>Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 8:26 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Comments on temporary housing

Hello Andrews, I fully support broadening land use regulations on hosting temporary encampments in the City of Lacey (my place of residence). My family lives in the Horizon Pointe community. With the Martin vs. Boise case we need to be able to redirect homeless people to where they “can be.” Kicking them out of their current location without an alternative is no longer the solution. Also, forcing individuals to participate in religious programs violates their constitutional rights. Therefore, we need non religious redirecting options. The responsible and dignified solution is to create “middle ground options toward permanent housing” that works for all people... That will by no means be achieved anytime soon, but I see this alteration to city code to relax land use codes that restrict temporary housing as a step in the right direction! Next on the list with regard to getting the homeless to a home is improving mental health services and encouraging mixed uses for land use. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and I look forward to hearing more at the Tuesday meeting. Sincerely, Angie Hong Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: ROBERT CARTINO <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 8:47 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: create more REPUBLICANS...

KEEP DESTROYING PROPERTY VALUES, AND THIS STATE WILL GO RED... TAKE THE HOMELESS INTO YOUR HOME...

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Lori McGetttrick <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 4:47 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Issues

Dear Sir; I am a new resident to Lacey. We bought our home off Carpenter Rd by the Thurston Co fairgrounds. I am already seeing homeless people spreading out thru Lacey and bringing their issues with them. I am not heartless but this is NOT what I want to live amongst or have my grandchildren exposed to on a daily basis. We picked this town for the safety, friendliness, and close proximity to JBLM. I commute daily and it sickens me to see the trash and encampments setting up in the beautiful wild areas within Lacey. This is not good for anyone. Please be aware of schools, children, and elderly who live and play and enjoy our clean safe city. STOP the encroachment from surrounding areas dirty and blight ours. Let them set up on city property or the capitol lawns. Lori J McGettrick

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Barbara <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 4:49 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Nonsense

To whom it may concern: We are not able to attend tonight' s meeting regarding any proposed homeless camps, but our stand is ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! Mandatory rehab OR go to jail. Enough of this enabling these people! Most of these creeps are not down on their luck, but rather choose to exist like this at OUR expense. Fix the damn situation and quit throwing bandaids on this growing and festering problem. Thurston county is dying along with numerous other locations. Are you not able to see this??? It's only going to get worst without tough intervention NOW! Barbara Chambers and Clint Burke

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Naomi Obie <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:35 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Housing proposal to expand homeless encampments

This new proposal will greatly expand what groups and where they may host homeless encampments, tents, tiny houses, or where to allow people to sleep in vehicles. I am adding my voice and the voices of my family to implore you not to allow Lacey to turn into another Seattle or San Francisco. Olympia's reputation as a lovely, beautiful place to live and raise a family or start a business is threatened by this proposal. Naomi and Ed Obie 6039 Hogan Drive SE Olympia, WA 98513

1

Ryan Andrews

From: John Christensen <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:12 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Proposal to change homelss encampments

Dear Mr. Andrews,

I want to voice my concerns regarding the changes to the current regulations surrounding homeless encampments. I realize that the council is trying to support individuals that are less fortunate in our community; however, this must not be done at the expense of the safety or financial detriment to its current residents. Instead, the city should focus on programs that teach responsibility, respect, and independence to these individuals. Merely finding them a place to squat without any connection to diligence or education is a recipe for disaster. It hurts property values, promotes crime, and divides communities.

I hope that my words will be considered while making this important decision.

Thank you,

John Christensen

Horizon Pointe

Lacey, Washington

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jason Rundell <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 4:50 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Change in homeless encampment rules

Dear Members of Lacey City Council, I am a retired US Army Officer who has lived in Thurston County off of Marvin Road for 20 years after I retired to take a position at the St. Peter Hospital Emergency Department in 1998 and have witnessed the city of Lacey grow significantly during that time. During that time I have also witnessed the degradation of other local communities into what appear to be lawless regions of free roaming vagrants who have a propensity toward drug/alcohol abuse who contribute nothing to their local community and only become a burden on the good law abiding/tax paying citizen within that community. I would never support any measure that would allow for that type of activity within our beautiful city. If you build it, they will come…and once they’re here there is will only be more. Vote no on changes to our existing regulations concerning homeless encampments. Thank you. Sincerely, Jason D. Rundell 2401 Mugho DR SE 98513

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Erin Armstrong <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:35 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless encampments proposal

To all concerned, It is interesting, when I go to Peoria, Arizona to see my son, I see a clean community full of hardworking citizens. I see jail crews in bright orange outfits and large sign on their transport trucks, stating they are jail workers, busy doing city clean up. What I do not see, is homeless encampments, random groups of tent cities, people pushing shopping carts piled high with their belongings, people running and screeching into the middle of oncoming traffic and piles of garbage and filth. If you or I pooped on our neighborhood sidewalks , shot up on our porches, assaulted our neighbors or piled up gabage all over our yards, we would be arrested, fined and even taken to jail. We have allowed the homeless to be irresponsible and non-contributing to our communities, bringing with them increased drug use, increased crime and illegal activites that are for the most part overlooked. We give, give, give to the homeless, but expect no responsibilty for their actions in return. We, as citizens of the Lacey, Olympia and surrounding communities, want to see people held responsible for their actions, become hard working citizens and contribute to our society as a whole.By increasing the homeless encampments, you would be increasing a problem that you are already unable to rectify. This is not the answer! Erin Armstrong 11125 Maple Creek Ln SE Olympia, Wa. 98501 [email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: James Kane <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 4:49 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Encampments

To whom it may concern, Do not arbitrarily expand areas for homeless. What is prompting this proposed expansion and who is behind the proposal? What specifically are the upsides to such an arbitrary change? Will more police be hired to monitor these encampments? Is this being pushed by the city of Olympia to alleviate a problem that their city government created? By offering enticements such as this will give the impression that Lacey has an “open door” policy and is willing and able to accept more transients with no benefit to the city of Lacey. Further, any proposed change should be thoroughly vetted with the Lacey community at large; this is too significant a budgetary, economic, and public safety issue to allow the city council to make the call. Lastly, I would expect city council member(s) who enthusiastically back this proposal to be the first to step up and establish such encampments in their neighborhoods, first. Sincerely, james kane 6039 Montague Lane SE Lacey, WA Sent from my iPad

1

Ryan Andrews

From: laurie jones <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 3:43 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless issues in Lacey

I do not support any expansion for homeless housing. I want any help for the homeless to to tied to lifestyle changes. If they are substance abusers and/or mentally ill, they need to be enrolled in a treatment program to receive additional help. If they are homeless for other reasons, there already are programs to help. Allowing people to live on our streets or in encampments does nothing to improve their lives or help the community. Expansion of programs without lifestyle change means we not only condone but approve. I do not approve.

Get Outlook for Android

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Jack Potter <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 3:22 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Tonight's city hall meetingAttachments: Window notice.docx

My Name is Jack Potter. You may or may not know of me. I'll be honest, On the bad side, I'm a level 1 registered sex offender. For that offense, I took an Alford plea and spent 23 months incarcerated. I got out Sept 2014. September this year I'll be 5 years into a 10 year registration with barely a hiccup. One the good side. When I got out, I founded Veterans Christian Charity, A homeless advocacy charity. Due to poor health, I was not able to maintain the paperwork and the state de-certified the charity, January of this year.While we were up and running our stats are such; We secured a building on 6800 Martin Way November 20th 2016, From then to May 3rd 2018 we operated Lacey's only homeless services center (actually the Peace center came in early 2018). We helped over 30 homeless people get off the streets permanently. (Yes, I know how to solve homelessness) and served well over 1000 more, who lived on the streets. We offered a clothing exchange (dirty clothes were exchanged for clean clothes, dirty clothes were washed), Hot meals, cold meals, to-go meals, showers, peer counseling, job referral, on-the-job training for both retail and food service. During the winter of 2016-2017 we housed up to 11 men upstairs and 6 women downstairs. We had "fire-watch" for everyone's security. Within 9 months of registering Veterans Christian Charity we were nominated "Best in Western Washington" In January of 2018, The center had run it's course. When one does God's work, Satan comes after you. With Michael Steadman's singling me out on social media as well as other local "up-standing" business leaders, the controversy of my past became too much and my voice was mostly silenced. As if a "soiled" background means NOTHING good may ever come from it again. Saul of the New Testament became Paul after jailing and murdering Christians. From his experiences we learn that even the most ruined background may be turned to good present and future. If allowed to. I took a year off to heal both physically (serious health issues), emotionally (homeless advocacy work is very draining) and Spiritually ( God told me I needed rest). Then I started (as a private citizen) promoting a program called Paid Safe Parking. Sgt Brimmer (Lacey Police ) likes the idea so much he took a picture of the window flyer I've developed for the program. I've attached it for your convenience. If I felt safe to speak tonight, I would attend. I do NOT feel safe so I can only hope that you will take some of what I offer as your own. I seek no recognition. Paid Safe Parking is a creative solution that EVERY homeless person (in a vehicle) that I've surveyed (over 50) has endorsed as well as a plethora of others who aren't homeless, like business owners, home owners and police. All the info you need is on the flyer. I hope you've read this, If you have, God Bless and Thank you. Please, now do something. Sincerely, Jack Potter 360-292-5608

Why Am I Parked On The Streets?

Would you believe we in RVs, and other vehicles do NOT want to live on the

streets?

There are many reasons we are out here. The reasons are as varied as the folks

surviving in the public eye.

What is the solution? Paid Safe Parking. To learn more, please see my videos

on Facebook (www.facebook.com/veteranschristiancharity) or YouTube (search

Paid Safe Parking Thurston County)

A VERY creative solution to those in vehicles being on the streets. If you like the

idea contact your local government, business, church or neighbor.

Street parking is expensive for us and for the community. Paid Safe Parking is a

creative solution that brings in money. Please take out your phone and Take a pic

of this notice so you know where to find information on Paid Safe Parking.

Thank you and God Bless!

You may contact Jack @ 360‐292‐5608 with any questions/ideas.

Hate texting/calling will be referred to police for prosecution as Jack will not put

up with being harassed, (he’s a veteran‐what would you expect?).

Until Paid Safe Parking becomes a reality;

“Dear Police Officer,

This is my HOME.

Please do not ticket my home. If I need to move it, an official notice on my

Home will be enough to fire up my engine. I’ll move along.

Thank you for protecting my rights to survive in this county.”

If you live in your vehicle or RV and would like to be involved in Paid Safe Parking,

Then Please post this in your window, contact Jack (360‐292‐5608).

Your vehicle/rig (as well as the driver being licensed) need to be licensed and

insured before entry into the Paid Safe Parking program.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Lynne Bennett <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 2:29 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless housing

I do not concur with expanding the rights for homeless people. We work hard to have our homes. As a single parent I always worked two or three jobs to make sure a roof stayed over my children. Do not allow additional expansion of homeless housing. Perhaps there's a way to give them back some pride through having them work for whatever the taxpayers are paying for oh, it's an idea? I also work in healthcare and see the population that mostly does not need the taxpayer help. It's a choice of living homeless. Those that absolutely need it of course I'm in favor of it but as a general rule and what I see there is no Pride but only handouts that the homeless population are looking for. I hope this helps .

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Mitchell Gordon <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 3:25 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homelessness

Hello Andrew, I’m unable to attend the meeting but here is my 2 cents. Whatever the track or circumstances that have caused someone to be homeless it’s a serious issue. I’m a retired Veteran who fought in Vietnam and Iraq. I have PTSD because of my combat tours doing what my Country, President and Military leaders ordered me to do. In my opinion no Veteran should be homeless, because of the horrors of war. These Veterans have never been relieved from their oath to: defend the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. We need to house homeless Veterans they have paid the price. Now others who are strung out on drugs using needles that’s a different and difficult problem to tackle. We should use old school buildings, prisons, and armories etc especially during inclement weather. There are plenty of empty buildings where one could stay for the evening pack up and reapply for the next evening so in and so forth. I hope this helps and gives some idea where we need to go as a County and Christian society. Regards, Mitchell Gordon Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Robert Mead <[email protected]>Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2019 8:58 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Comments on Changes to Lacey Homeless PoliciesAttachments: homeless.txt

The attached text file contains my comments. Please feel free to contact me, and add my name to the e-mail list for this project. Thank You. -- Robert D. Mead 1317 Crowe Street SE Lacey, WA 98503 360-727-1788 [email protected]

To Ryan Andrews, City of Lacey

From Robert D. Mead

1317 Crowe St. SE

Lacey, WA 98503

Subject: Revisions to Lacey Homeless Policies (Planning Commission)

I am a Lacey resident, and I wish to express my support for changes to Lacey’s homeless ordinances that

would allow additional types of organizations to host homeless camps.

There is no single solution to the problem of homelessness, but I feel that organized, sanctioned, camps

that have supporting social services are an essential part of what solution is possible. Not all people

who are homeless are actively seeking help, but for those many who want help, this type of camp is a

more cost-effective avenue to providing those services.

Also, as an atheist, it disturbs me that preference is given to faith-based groups in providing those

services. Has not that kind of governmental preference of religion been ruled unconstitutional by

numerous court rulings? That would seem to make changes to Lacey’s policies mandatory.

In summary, I support any changes to Lacey’s homeless policies that will facilitate the creation of well-

regulated homeless facilities that will help pull even some people out of homelessness. The social costs

of not doing so far exceed the costs of the status quo.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Susie Zych <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 6:18 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless

I vote "no" to relaxing the current laws. I vote "yes" to expanding our council and bring on board experts who have knowledge of works and doesn't work in the community. It's a tough situation and increasingly becoming dangerous. What I don't understand is why the homeless refuse to be "housed" - drugs? I'm sure. Look at the Drexel house model. Is it working? I suggest a round table discussion where homeless, homeless advocates, and those that oppose sit around the table and talk to each other. I'm sorry I missed the meeting. Susie Zych

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Paul Maclurg <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 5:45 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homelessness in Lacey

Dear My Andrews, I was unable to attend the meeting recently, but wanted to comment. I am a compassionate caring person who values every human being. I am also a person who values justice and am not content with people being allowed to live life as they please, making it more difficult on others. What keeps coming back to me is the "Seattle is Dying" documentary. If you have not seen it, it is a MUST for every city manager, city council, etc... to see. It describes Seattle to a "T" and in my opinion, Olympia. It also puts a "solution" on the table rather than enabling people to live life they way they want. I believe there are those who are not drug/alcohol addicted, but the majority living in tent cities fit the "Seattle description." The solution is something that MUST be considered and acted on; Lacey could be a model city since we are not overwhelmed with the problem yet, but it is beginning. Enforcement against lawlessness and then bringing resources to the table to help them will be the best solution...if applied to really help rather than enable. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Paul MacLurg Franchise Owner Thrive Community Fitness Lacey, WA PS I have been in the city for over 10 years as a business owner.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Julie Wagner <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 9:16 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homelessness

Dear Mr. Andrews, I was in attendance at the Tuesday night public hearing at City Hall in Lacey. What a complex issue this is! There are no easy answers. My work with the homeless would indicate that many of the homeless were mischaracterized at the meeting. Many are mentally ill and a fair amount are addicts. Putting them into camps is only a first step in handling this problem and won't address all of their issues. The most profound statement I heard at the meeting was that there is no housing that is a step-up from that of the encampment where these people can go if they are capable of it. Finding/building this housing must be part of a long-term plan. We cannot think that one move (putting people in an encampment) is the answer. The planning commission needs to plan for 10 years or more. Part of that planning would be to address the state legislature about help for the mentally ill and the drug-addicted. Thank you for opening up the meeting to the public. While I think the strong desire expressed to not cater to the homeless was the basic sentiment of the group, none of the problems expressed (shop lifting, pan-handling, uncleanliness, etc.) will be changed without a well-thought-out, long-term plan. Thank you for the city's work on this issue. The issue is huge, complex, and will require the work of many agencies. I look forward to hearing how you move forward. Julie Wagner 2107 Alpha Street SE Lacey, WA 98503

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Stephen R. Dobron <[email protected]>Sent: Monday, May 27, 2019 9:34 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Keep Homeless Camps out of Lacey

Ryan, My wife and I have lived in Lacey for just about 3 years now and do not support any plans the city may have for additional sanctioned homeless camps. We frequently struggle with RV and car campers illegally parked near our home on Rainier Loop SE. Last summer, I found over a dozen syringes in back of our house that appeared at the same time several vehicles were present. Many of these vehicles have expired registrations (up to 3 years or even longer and are from out of state). Due to lack of registration, no one knows who these people are and whether or not they have a record of criminal or sex offenses. Even if the city has a strict 'sanctioned camp' only policy, changes that allow sanctioned camps not only enable, but encourage additional non-sanctioned camps to form. I am a licensed civil engineer and work primarily in bridge inspection and see many camps first hand frequently while on the job. Several camps I've been through have been riddled with biohazards (syringes, garbage, even piles of feces). These camps are also a haven for crime, as proven by the Seattle Police Department's recent bust of a drug ring operating out of a South Seattle homeless camp, which recovered $20,000 in cash as well as a large quantity of drugs and stolen items. The cost of cleanup of these camps is astronomical and may take weeks. If the city chooses to host camps; it is fiscally irresponsible and will only increase the homeless population as well as property crime in Lacey. Olympia created a problem with their period of no enforcement for any camping which lasted for most of 2018. During that time, their homeless population exploded. It is not our duty to fix the problem that Olympia created.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Judy <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 9:17 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey City Meetings On HomelessnessAttachments: H-2018-PIT-snapshot.pdf

Mr. Andrews, I read the article in today’s Olympian about Lacey’s recent planning meeting concerning homeless camps and a planned council meeting on the subject. It is unfortunate that most people are poorly informed about who is homeless and why. Unless residents are better informed, it might be hard to have productive meetings and helpful public input. I strongly urge the city to use the results of the (2018) Point In Time census for Thurston County to do some public education on the subject. Olympia has had success doing this at its recent town hall meetings. I’ve attached the summary sheet for last year’s census; you may be familiar with it. It is concise, descriptive, visually appealing, and a great educational tool. Perhaps it could be used for a series of educational meetings that discuss the statistics. If it would be helpful, I would be glad to send you some ideas on how such meetings might be structured. Unless we have a better “informed citizenry”, it will be hard for Lacey to make progress on this issue. Judy Kennedy Lacey 98503

2018 THURSTON COUNTY POINT-IN-TIME

HOMELESSNESS SNAPSHOT

Not all people experiencing homelessness sleep outside

20%Out of doors

(street, tent, etc.)

40%Emergency

shelter

22%Transitional

housing

18%Vehicle, abandoned

building, other

2018 Point-In-Time Count ResultsEach January, Thurston County conducts a “point-in-time count” to capture the number and characteristics of people living without a home.

7%Veterans

1.2%Unaccompaniedyouth & young adults

45% Female

835Homeless persons counted

23%Chronically homeless

For more info contact:Anna Schlecht | [email protected]

How long have people been homeless?

38% Householdswith children

Most said they lived in Thurston County before becoming homeless59% Thurston County

Other WA counties

28% Outside WA13%

*However, people of color makeup only 18% of the Thurston County population.

29%People of color*

25%Victims of domestic violence

The main causes of homelessness are related to economic & family stabilitySurvey respondents shared many causes for becoming homeless. These are the top four:

1.

2.

3.

4.

Job loss/unemployment

Eviction/loss of housing

Family rejection

Domestic violence

28%Chronic health condition

24%Physical disability

19%Mental illness

19%Substance use

10%Developmental disability

Physical health is the most commonly reported disabilityHere is the breakdown of the most commonly reported disabilities. Some people reported having multiple disabilities.

Less than one year38%

More than one year

62%

Coming soon: A City of Olympia website with information on homelessness.

163 143100

203

432

204

377321

147 155 174 166 182

156

249

168

323

181

95

167

113

172 158

223 244

333122

187

194

219

363

267

164

230

257

163

189124

320

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Nu

mb

er

of H

om

ele

ss In

div

idu

als

PIT Year

Thurston County - Point in Time Homeless Counts 2006-2018Final Report - May 2018

Transitional Sheltered Unsheltered

579

462

745

976

566

708664

576

476

586534

835

Goal 220

Thurston County PIT Progress Chart – Explanatory Notes by Year

2006: 1st year baseline of 441 - Reduction goal = 222 2011: Decrease due to large inventory of new housing

2008: Decrease due to large inventory of new housing 2015: Homelessness drops with Recession recovery

2010: Increase correlates with Recession highpoint 2017: Decrease due to limited staff capacity

2011: Transitional Housing Stock converted to Permanent 2018: Homeless increase correlates with rent increases

441

1

Ryan Andrews

From: gregg palmer <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 10:11 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Proposed Changes to Lacey/Homeless Population

To Whom It May Concern, I have reviewed the comments/input via the Horizon Pointe web site regarding the proposed changes to the city's existing emergency housing facility regulations and potential homeless encampments. It has been well covered on both local news and national news that this issue is a crisis. Solutions have been brought to the table and money has been thrown at this problem. For Seattle, the people have requested formally and informally for the city to account for the millions of dollars that have been thrown at this problem. These questions have not been answered properly. Instead of expanding homeless encampments local and state government needs to be more transparent regarding the issue before expanding areas. People need to know the truth about where the money has gone. Forcing this issue down our throats is bordering on impeding on our constitutional rights. Most of the news indicates that less than 25% of the homeless population is willing to get help/housing. If they are not willing to improve themselves then why should we be asked to endure the exposure that they bring to our communities? For every council member or state representative that loosens the restrictions for homeless people, they need to invite the homeless to camp out in their back/front yard. Gregg and Angie Palmer 4948 Balustrade Blvd SE Lacey WA 98513

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Warren West <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 8:41 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Re: Kevin Thomas sent you a message.

Hello Ryan, I would propose that Lacey look at what Arlington, Wa. is doing. If I understand correctly, They send authorities out to the homeless and ask them if they need help. The city helps them get into programs to get off drugs, seek employment, food and housing. If they decline help, they will be arrested if they are doing any illegal activities. Thank you Warren West

On Monday, May 20, 2019 10:52 AM, Kevin Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: Kevin Thomas sent you a message. Open Messenger You'll need to use Messenger to see and respond to Kevin 's message. With Messenger, you can text, and make voice and video calls for free (standard mobile data and text message charges apply).

Messenger Open Messenger

Kevin Thomas sent you a message.

Open Messenger

You'll need to use Messenger to see and respond to Kevin's message. With Messenger, you can text, and make voice and video calls for free (standard mobile data and text message charges apply).

This message was sent to [email protected]. If you don't want to receive these emails from Facebook in the future, please

unsubscribe.

Facebook, Inc., Attention: Community Support, 1 Facebook Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025

To help keep your account secure, please don't forward this email. Learn more.

1

Ryan Andrews

From: troy paananen <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 8:55 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Regarding homelessness

Hi, My name is Troy and I live on the border of Lacey and Olympia with my wife and 4 year old son. I am a registered nurse and work at Capital Medical Center. I recently read an article about the city trying to decide how to approach the homeless situation in Lacey. I implore you not to increase the amount of services provided by any means (nonprofit, government, etc.). I am originally from Napa California and moved up to Washington to buy a home and raise my family because California has become increasingly toxic for raising a family. There are many reasons for this, but one is related to safety. It's no secret that an increased homeless presence brings more illicit drug use, more crime, and more sexual assault. One thing that I love about the city of Lacey is that there seems to be a huge emphasis on the importance of strong families. I understand wanting to help a fellow human being, but by enabling illegal behavior in our town you are risking our children's safety. As a nurse I have dealt with this population first hand on a regular basis. They are toxic, poisoned by drugs and alcohol and if they have a true desire to become sober they can go to a hospital for a safe detox, and then work with social workers to find an appropriate rehab. But providing services to people who have no intention of quitting their addiction is foolish and will be devastating for the entire town. Addiction is incredibly powerful, and ruins many lives, but enabling the behavior is the worst thing you can do for an addict. Please don't let a very vocal minority outweigh the desires of the strong and silent majority. The people of Lacey want a safe, and successful community and increasing resources for the homeless will make that impossible to accomplish. Thank you for your time Troy Paananen

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Paul <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 11:09 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Regulations for Emergency Housing Regulations

Ryan: I’m requesting to be placed on an email list regarding any meetings pertaining to changes in regulations for Emergency Housing Regulations. I volunteer at Sacred Heat’s Emergency shelter and want to keep track how any proposed changes would impact our program. Thanks, Paul Perz [email protected] Sent from Mail for Windows 10

1

Ryan Andrews

From: john a. fischer <[email protected]>Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2019 11:58 AMTo: Ryan Andrews

I would to see Lacey keep the faith‐based only groups doing homeless work. They practise an holistic approach to the issue. Something government cannot and should not be involved in. Take a look at our neighbor Olympia and go the opposite direction to keep our fair city just that, fair to all. John Fischer. 4274 Dudley Dr ne Lacey. 253‐651‐2107

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Raymond H. Payne Jr. <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 4:11 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Comments on Emergency Temporary Housing Changes to LMCAttachments: Homelessness Four Point Plan (Final).docx

Dear Ryan, I am writing in support of the proposed changes to the Lacey Municipal Code regarding Emergency Temporary Housing as presented at the May 21, 2019 Lacey Planning Commission Public Hearing. I think in the long term it is important that Lacey be in line with its regional partners on the issue of homelessness. What the Lacey Planning Commission has come with is a great first step, there is more that needs to be done to address homelessness. Please find attached a four point plan I believe will help solve the homeless issue. I hope you will share with the Planning Commission and City Staff. Lacey can take the lead in providing reasonable low cost solutions to this difficult issue. Please feel free to contact me by email or at (937) 626‐5277 if there is anything you want or need to discuss further. Very Respectfully, Raymond H. Payne, Jr.

As promised my four point plan for addressing homelessness:

1. Housing.

As the Health Care for the Homeless movement puts it, “housing is healthcare.” Housing is

safety and security. Housing provides a stable launchpad from which people can get and keep a

job, address mental illness and substance use, take care of their health and nutrition, and find

purposeful role in the community.

Having defined homelessness, we cannot address it by thinking of a solution on a person by

person, family by family basis. Yes we can sit her and blame Ronald Reagan for slashing the

affordable housing budget, but that would get us nowhere.

Although we have never recovered from these disastrous public policy decisions, we must come

up with new and innovative ways to return to what we know works.

If Lacey expects to end homelessness, we cannot merely divide the current resource pie

differently. Dividing the resource pie pits one group against another (singles vs. families vs.

youth vs. veterans), etc. This approach also pits housing against shelter and housing against

services. We need a commitment—public and private—to make sure there is affordable housing

for all. We need to start viewing housing as a basic human right, without which people cannot

lead stable, connected lives.

If we expect to end homelessness, housing is the fundamental starting place.

2. Services.

While there is a universal recognition that housing is key, it is not self sufficient. Providing

adequate housing without addressing physical health, behavioral health, employment and

education, and other supports, will continue to result in instability and recurrent homelessness for

many people..

We all need services. Health care is a service. Childcare is a service. Transportation is a service.

So are case management, substance abuse treatment, and supported employment.

People who are homeless face a myriad of complex challenges and providing housing alone wont

help that much. We must find a way to ensure that services are available, accessible, and

affordable across the lifespan. Without such comprehensive supports, how can we expect

housing alone to end homelessness in a way that is real, deep, and sustainable?.

If we focus on housing alone, we will never end homelessness.

3. Social Connectedness.

Now that I have a key to that house or apartment, now what? Moving into your own place for the

first time may lead to loneliness, depression, and relapse. Often time people will attempt suicide

or go back to the streets where there friends are to cope.

If we think that a housing subsidy and supportive services can create community and human

connection, we are so sadly mistaken.

Lacey must follow the lead of nations such Denmark and Scotland who have focused on social

inclusion and who have tirelessly worked to actively to destigmatize mental illness, substance

use disorders, homelessness, and poverty.

Until we see one another as equal human beings, worthy of living happy and fulfilled and

connected lives, we will continue to think of the world in terms of “us” and “them”—a world

view that is fundamentally flawed.

Creating a strategy for social inclusion and social connectedness must be part of Lacey’s

community thinking to end homelessness.

4. Prevention.

I am tired. I am tired of the homeless industrial complex. I am tired of the homeless policy echo

chamber. I am tired of focusing on down range solutions that kick in once people have already

slipped through our flimsy safety nets. We can never end homelessness by ending homelessness

one person at a time. While that work is critical, it is never going to be enough.

After decades of research and practice innovation, we never seem to generate the political will to

fund programs at levels necessary to meet the need. We celebrate housing 50 people here and a

hundred there, as we should. But we continue not to do enough for the hundreds of individuals,

families, and youth still experiencing homelessness each night in the Lacey area.

More importantly, we have yet to focus our full attention on homelessness prevention.

Homelessness prevention means more than just intervening at eviction court and providing a

short term housing subsidy to stabilize a family who is about to be thrown out of their place.

While that may be one important strategy, true prevention will require research to understand

who is at most risk for becoming homelessness. Then it will require going as far up range as

possible to provide that person or family with the appropriate supports—financially, emotionally,

and otherwise—to ensure that they do not slip into homelessness. It will require immense

creativity of a type that we have not yet mobilized in our local response to homelessness.

Prevention will require a big view that can look across multiple systems—housing, healthcare,

homelessness, education, child welfare, criminal justice, employment, and many others—to

identify pathways into homelessness, then design solutions that catch people before they fall.

That is hard work. And it is work that many in the homelessness sector have said is not their job.

We have said it is the job of the mainstream to do that work.. I have seen little evidence that

mainstream healthcare, education, employment, child welfare or criminal justice systems give a

darn about homelessness.

All of which raises the question: If not us, then who? If not now, then when?

It is time that we begin to go up range and stem the flow of people into homelessness. If we do

not, how can we ever expect to end homelessness?

We Must End Homelessness Once and for all

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Brian Hovis <[email protected]>Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2019 8:13 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Comments on Lacey's proposed housing ordinance

Dear City of Lacey, Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments about the possible changes to the city’s ordinances to assist people without adequate shelter. It makes every bit of sense to revise the ordinances to expand opportunities to provide shelter beyond faith‐based organizations. Things have changed dramatically since the time the original ordinance was put into place in response to the former Camp Quixote mobile shelter program.

1. I perceive homeless camps on private and public property to be more widespread than it was at the time the ordinances were adopted. There is evidence that makeshift shelters are expanding into publicly owned woodland in Lacey and North Thurston County. It’s imperative that our local governments ensure the health and safety of its residents, whether sheltered or not, and health and safety may be disproportionately high in encampments without adequate sanitation or law enforcement opportunities to deal with those who may already be feeling a sense of isolation and desperation.

2. There is a moral, practical, and lawful reason that the jurisdictions can’t continue to clean up these camps without providing alternatives. As noted in today’s Olympian editorial, simply evacuating unsanctioned shelters without providing alternative sanctioned shelters, simply means that the population will move elsewhere. The person at the Lacey community meeting who said, “just enforce the existing laws,” somewhat misses the point that the historic approach of making the camps go away by forcibly destroying an encampment does not work in the long run. It doesn’t work here and it does not work elsewhere. Court rulings have made it clear that, from a legal perspective, governments must provide an alternative. I believe that is the moral thing to do too.

3. The reasons for being unsheltered are many and to resolve those issues it takes additional resources. I worked at Sidewalk as a housing advocate for a couple of years. I understand the many reasons that a person can lose housing. Those reasons include addiction, mental health challenges, changes in health, disabilities, and loss of income. There are probably more too, but the point about all these reasons is that they often require more expertise and money than a normal faith‐based organization can summon. In order to move people from a homeless camp to being safety sheltered, it will take a lot of effort and faith‐based organizations often don’t have that kind of expertise available. Partnership with a non‐profit and government staffs that have that expertise makes a lot of sense.

The changes to the way that the City of Lacey proposes to assist with providing temporary shelter are very small and make a lot of sense to me. I am surprised at the outcry. I think that what the public hearing really signifies is that the Lacey citizens are very unhappy with the current state of affairs. They are fearful that Lacey will become what they see in Olympia and they also may want the camps and the people who live in them, to simply go away. What they may fail to see is that there own opposition to having the city be part of the solution may ultimately mean a worse situation in Lacey. Because of this heightened citizen awareness, the City of Lacey needs to be part of the solution and become an active partner with county government and other jurisdictions to better assist the unsheltered population in Thurston County. It is not really just Olympia’s problem: it happens in Lacey and Tumwater too. It will happen more in those jurisdictions if Olympia continues with its approach, because unsanctioned camps will go outside of Olympia. The goal should be to make sure that all residents of Thurston County have some kind of safe and healthy shelter, and the people in those camps are offered the kind of support they need to transition into more permanent housing. It won’t work for everyone, but it will change the equation from what it is now to a managed situation.

2

Brian Hovis 3949 Holladay Park Loop SE Lacey WA 98503 [email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Paul Borreson <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 4:57 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Expanding homeless services

Please do not turn our city into downtown Olympia or Seattle....no free injection sites, and we need accountability for the criminals, drug addicts, and drug dealers. Paul M Borreson Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Rick WalkSent: Friday, May 24, 2019 7:56 AMTo: Ryan Andrews; Jessica BrandtSubject: FW: Followup Letter Tuesday 5-21-19 MeetingAttachments: Letters Lacey City Council LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities 5-21-19 and

5-23-19.docx; ATT00001.htm

FYR

From: Cynthia Pratt Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 9:15 PM Subject: Fwd: Followup Letter Tuesday 5‐21‐19 Meeting

Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message:

From: "DIANE S. WHALEN" <[email protected]> Date: May 23, 2019 at 5:58:15 PM PDT To: <[email protected]> Subject: Followup Letter Tuesday 5-21-19 Meeting Reply-To: "DIANE S. WHALEN" <[email protected]>

Dear Mayor Ryder and Council Members,

At Tuesday's hearing on the Amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities, I heard the deadline for public comments would be extended to May 31. Thank you for extending this deadline. The attached document includes my first letter and a second one. I know you already have the first in your files and if you would like me to just send the one I wrote today separately, please let me know. I just thought it might be easier to file them together.

Thank you all for the difficult work you do on behalf of all Lacey's people.

Sincerely,

Diane Whalen

May 21, 2019

Re: Lacey City Council Public Hearing

Amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities


My name is Diane Whalen, a priest serving Holy Wisdom Inclusive Catholic Community which meets at

St. Benedict’s Episcopal Church in Lacey. I have been involved with a clergy group, Concerned Clergy of

Olympia, which seeks to understand and be part of solutions to the complex problems around

homelessness in our area so am happy to know you are holding a public hearing on amendments to

Lacey’s Temporary Emergency Housing Ordinance to bring them into closer alignment with those of the

City of Olympia. Unfortunately, I am unable to be present at the hearing but ask that you consider my

comments and include them in the record.

As you well know, though much attention has been given to Olympia’s response to the crisis of

homelessness, Lacey, Thurston County and many other places are coming to terms with the fact that this

is a regional and national problem that is primarily the result of systemic economic, social and housing

market failures. And as would be true with any complex situation manifested over several jurisdictions,

coordination among those jurisdictions can lead to more coherent and comprehensive responses. I see the

proposed amendments as a step in that direction and ask you to take a further step.

My hope is that you will both move forward with approving the amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency

Housing Facilities and make further changes to bring Lacey’s regulations more in line with those of the

City of Olympia where they have studied the certain practices and have made some decisions based on

evidence based effective practice.

Some of these evidence based findings include the importance of allowing for low barrier shelters in order

to meet the needs of individuals who may have substance abuse, mental health or medical challenges or

those who for various reasons may not have ID or background check verification. Amending the

language in Lacey’s existing ordinance would still allow managers of Emergency Housing Facilities

to require ID and background checks but would not mandate this by law in every sheltering

situation.

Denying our most vulnerable neighbors the possibility of shelter, toilet facilities and a safe place to put

their possessions and leaving them to fend for themselves neither helps them nor makes our community

more safe. Nor is it a compassionate response to fellow human beings, many of whom struggle just to

survive.

So, I ask that you:

- move forward with approving the amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities;

- support further reducing barriers, including requirements around ID and background checks to

allow for a greater range of effective solutions; and

- continue to work with other jurisdictions to meet the difficult challenges we face as a region.

Thank you for your hard work on behalf of all the citizens of Lacey, especially those who have so little

power or voice at this time in their lives.

Sincerely,

Rev. Dr. Diane S. Whalen

May 23, 2019

Re: Lacey City Council Public Hearing

Amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities


I was the woman, identifiable as a clergy person, who testified at the meeting on Tuesday

evening. I had no idea how many people would be at the meeting or how much time would be

allotted; nor did I anticipate the amount of fear and hostility towards our houseless neighbors. As

a result, while I did encourage you to accept the proposed amendments and would encourage

lowering barriers for houseless people to receive help, most of what I said had to do with the fact

that in most cases, systemic problems are the primary cause of homelessness so we need to have

systemic solutions. I was stunned that people were shaking their heads “no” at my suggestion.

I am grateful for the fact that you had this open hearing and were able to hear the frustration and

fear of those who see themselves as the “real” citizens of Lacey but was dismayed that so many

people expressed the belief that if homeless people would just decide to pull themselves together

they would be able to get themselves out of their sad situations.

As you know, systemic issues of lack of housing and living wage jobs and the pulling back of

funds from the Federal government have much more to do with the crisis we are facing than the

inability of people to pull themselves up by their boot straps. There are no simple fixes and

causing houseless people even more stress than what they already endure in order to make them

go somewhere else just doesn’t work. As Ryan said during the meeting, at this point there is

nowhere else for them to go.

I saw an article on HuffPost today I thought was helpful:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/homeless-utah-end-america-salt-lake-

city_n_5cd1cac0e4b04e275d511aba?utm_source=pocket-newtab.

Here is a quote from the article:

“The biggest hindrance to solving homelessness is that city residents keep demanding the

least effective policies,” said Sara Rankin, the director of the Homeless Rights Advocacy

Project at Seattle University School of Law. The evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates

that punishing homeless people makes it harder for them to find housing and get work.

Nonetheless, the most common demands from urban voters are for politicians to increase

arrests, close down soup kitchens and impose entry requirements and drug tests in

shelters.

“Homelessness is a two-handed problem,” Rankin said. “One hand is everything you’re

doing to make it better and the other is everything you’re doing to make it worse. Right

now, we spend far more effort undoing our progress than advancing it.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/homeless-utah-end-america-salt-lake-city_n_5cd1cac0e4b04e275d511aba?utm_source=pocket-newtab

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/homeless-utah-end-america-salt-lake-city_n_5cd1cac0e4b04e275d511aba?utm_source=pocket-newtab

https://academic.oup.com/socpro/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/socpro/spz004/5422958

http://nclr.ucpress.edu/content/22/1/99.abstract

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2620426

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-officials-say-more-sweeps-of-homeless-camps-in-the-works/

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-officials-say-more-sweeps-of-homeless-camps-in-the-works/

https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/10/05/costa-mesa-mayor-proposes-to-shut-down-soup-kitchens-to-deal-with-homeless-problem/

http://houseofhopelowell.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Strict-rules-force-homeless-families-into-risky-situations-The-Boston-Globe.pdf

https://www.inlander.com/Bloglander/archives/2017/10/27/as-homeless-shelters-fill-up-union-gospel-mission-charges-for-drug-tests-to-enter-shelter

Suggestions I heard during Tuesday’s meeting if enacted, feel like they have the potential to

allow things to get much worse. What we need are evidence based data and experts who can

share what we have learned more widely with the public. We also need to tap into people’s basic

humanity and compassion. I’m sure that the folks who spoke so vehemently about wanting

homeless people to go away would not want anyone to suffer but I heard several of them saying

people need to accept and be grateful for whatever help we decide is best for them, when in

reality, that “them” is composed of unique individuals with different challenges as well as

positives in their lives. Even in that, most houseless folks I’ve spoken with are grateful for

whatever help they do get.

But when fear takes over and we lump everyone in a category and hold strong beliefs about those

in that category, compassion suffers and so does reasonable and reasoned dialogue.

Below are statements from Just Housing. I have rearranged and placed some of these statements

in bold to clarify what I want to share with you as you move forward in this issue of the

Amendments to LMC 16.64 Emergency Housing Facilities.

Why reducing ID and Background Check barriers can be helpful in addressing issues

involving homelessness.

Background checks/reporting requirements are currently one of the most significant

barriers keeping people from accessing shelter and services. Failing to adopt lower-

barrier screening requirements will severely limit who (the number of people) the

amended version of the ordinance will impact, as a sizeable number of people will still be

unable to access safe and legal shelter.

A considerable number of people living on the streets do not have ID and are unable

to obtain it for numerous reasons (inability to obtain other proof of identification,

costs, no address, etc).

Host/sponsor agencies should be able to determine who can and cannot access their

shelter/encampment. (Ex. Allowing the agencies to determine what levels of sex

offenders-if any- they will accept and whether or not they will accept people with active

warrants.)

Banning people with warrants/requiring providers of services to report people with

warrants does not improve community safety. For one, most warrants those who are

unsheltered have are for non-violent and minor crimes. Further, if this is the

requirement, people with warrants will simply continue to not access services, which

inhibits our ability as a community to effectively respond to this crisis.

Most shelters, including The Mitigation Site, have lower-barrier background

check/reporting requirements. These lower-barrier requirements have been successful

enough to not require amendments and have not been shown to jeopardize the

public safety of neighbors and the surrounding community.

There are no laws that ban people with sex offenses (with the exception of sex

offenses involving minors) from private, religious, or public property. Not enabling

hosts to decide at their own discretion who they will allow at their encampment is

creating an unnecessary barrier.

Making it so that all sex offenders cannot access any sanctioned shelter makes our

community more unsafe. It is statistically proven that the more unstable people’s

living conditions are, the more likely it is that people with sex offenses will re-offend.

This is why people’s sex offender level increases when they become homeless.

Enabling hosts/sponsors to determine what levels- if any- of sex offenders they will

accept increases the likelihood that even people with sex offenses will be able to

access safe and legal shelter, improving the general safety of our community.

Thank you all for your courage and hard work in the difficult job you have taken on - caring for

the needs of all the people of Lacey.

Sincerely,

Diane Whalen

Rev. Dr. Diane S. Whalen

[email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Susan D. <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 10:36 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: FW: Homeless Camps

Mr. Andrews, Below is an email I sent to the City Council, but am forwarding to you for consideration as the proposed ordinance changes are further vetted and refined. After reading the article in the Daily Olympian and your quote regarding faith institutions to host camps on their property but have non‐profits run them – if that is the intent then the ordinance language must be made explicitly clear that is what is being allowed – not any non‐profit to host a camp anywhere. Thank you. Susan DeBlasio

From: Susan D. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 12:39 AM To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: Homeless Camps I understand that at this minute you are getting input from the community regarding revision of Lacey ordinances in relation to temporary camps for the homeless. I encourage you to solicit wider public comments on this topic before taking final actions. I am VERY concerned regarding the elimination of buffer zones between these camps and schools – especially grade schools. Seven year old children should not have to be directly exposed to used needles, public urination, mental health issues and substance abuse issues on a daily basis. That is exactly what will happen if the buffer zones are eliminated. This happens now in our area where there is a “half‐way” house (half‐way to what is unknown). Since it opened, there is open drug use in the areas that the children walk on their way to school. It is no longer safe for them to cut through the greenbelt to get to the sidewalk due to the used needles that have been left on their trail. The police have been called numerous times to deal with individuals passed‐out on these same sidewalks. Nothing happens to change the situation. I am further concerned that any non‐profit could have a camp. This does not seem like a manageable proposition, especially without location restrictions. They should only be allowed to do so on property that they own (not lease). They should not be allowed to do so within an established housing community. Older developments like Brentwood or Bel‐Air have larger lots that a single homeowner could invite an encampment onto. That is entirely unfair to the immediate neighbors. Who will take responsibility for increased crime and drug paraphernalia clean up? How far will a situation have to deteriorate before the City shuts a camp down? What are the rules? Also, I encourage you to reconsider allowing these camps to go on essentially for years without any requirement for the participants to actively be seeking assistance. This does not encourage the chronically homeless to make any changes and, again is harmful to the surrounding community. Nor does it require a proactive approach to help those who do want assistance. I am not one of the “not in my neighborhood” folks that are against everything – but I hope that your actions reflect that you care about the citizens of your community that will ultimately have to pay for and live with the decisions you make.

2

Susan DeBlasio Lacey Resident 55 years

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Scott <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 6:24 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless

I do not want to see Lacey turn into Olympia or Seattle, this has outraged a lot of people and my hope is the council will listen and vote this down Sent from my iPhone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Cindy Sharpe <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 3:56 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless proposal

Hello Mr. Andrews, I did not get the opportunity to attend the meeting and speak, so I am writing to add my comments to the record. While I do believe that we need to address homelessness, I don’t agree that expanding temporary homeless “encampments” is the right way to address the issue. We only need to look at other communities that are successful at addressing homelessness to get ideas on how Lacey can also have a successful program. Adopting a “housing first” model, like Maine, Ohio, Utah, New York and cities in Europe, is a proven way to address the real issues of homelessness, some of which are mental health needs, addiction, joblessness and poverty. Hosting temporary “encampments” with tents is not giving people homes and stability they need. “Housing First” has three components: 1. Create a Community Shelter Board that oversees the homeless response budget and coordinates service providers. 2. Build or find permanent, supportive, affordable housing, now just allow open areas for tents or temporary dwellings, which create unhealthy and unsanitary conditions, not only for the encampment residents, but all residents located near or around the encampments. Place home-deficient people in real properties with four walls, a roof, a kitchen and a bath, and provide them with rental assistance and supportive services, such as food, mental health and addition counseling. Then work to address the individual and his/her needs, with the goal of getting him/her functioning back into society.

3. Have a plan and commit funds to address the causes of homelessness: Lack of mental healthcare, lack of addiction treatment, poverty, and once these are met, provide job training and job resources and placement. The city could benefit from the rehabilitated citizens who want to work, by providing jobs that will not only benefit them but the entire community, such as work teams modeled after AmeriCorps, but paid positions that serve the public good (i.e. beautification projects).

I’m pretty sure the city does not have the funds to commit to this yet without a plan, so trying to address the issue by just providing room for more tents, while not providing a full range of support services, will not address the problem, it only creates new ones for the community as a whole. That’s why I’m advocating that the city not change the current code, but instead offer leadership and create a plan that will truly help people and generate funds that will accomplish this. We do not need to create more spaces where people merely dwell, but not really live meaningful, productive lives.

2

Here’s a link to one such program: https://www.csb.org/how-we-do-it/ Thank you for the opportunity to provide my thoughts and input. Cindy Sharpe 3624 Arbor Dr. SE, Lacey, WA 98503 813/244-2883 cell/text [email protected]

1

Ryan Andrews

From: proacct.kp <[email protected]>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 7:01 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Homeless Solution

Good Morning Ryan Homeless has been a recurring theme in many decades through out history. Unemployment Relief Camps. ...During the Great Depression, the federal government sanctioned the creation of a system of unemployment relief camps, where in exchange for room-and-board, single men did labour. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Sandra Williams <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 1:30 PMTo: Ryan AndrewsCc: Joy AdamsSubject: Comments on Homeless OrdinanceAttachments: Scanhomeless.pdf

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Cyndy Manning <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 10:55 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: homeless encampment off Martin and Carpenter

We are outraged at the continuous denial of the DRUG problem in this state and country. This is a DRUG problem NOT a homeless problem !! The small number of people who have fallen on bad times don't hang out in these filthy encampments they take advantage of the MANY Social Services that we tax payers pay dearly for. These people are breaking many many laws and should be arrested for their own good. Why is it so difficult to recognize that these addicts need to be put in a confined facility for no less than 3 yrs and treated, made to get a GED, counselled and then released to make something of their lives. Once again those of us who have always tried to make good choices for ourselves and families and always followed the laws now have to be punished financially for those who have not. Save the millions and millions that are spent on temporary, unproductive fixes and do something permanent. Thank You, Regards from concerned and frustrated citizens

1

Ryan Andrews

From: Athena Thomas <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 9:23 AMTo: Ryan AndrewsSubject: Lacey Homeless

I wanted to take a minute to express my concern regarding the "homeless" issues here in Lacey/Thurston County. I'm not exactly sure why the City of Lacey is wanting to put themselves in the same situation as the downtown Olympia area has/did for so many years. We all see how successful they were with wanting to be a stationary City and the residual mess that has left them to now clean up and the destruction on the what use to be a nice place to bring out of town guests and shop the small business. Now it is literally a dump of feces and drug paraphernalia. So sad... Now the City of Lacey is purposing the same be done to our City...? So many of these "homeless" (really let's call it what it is even though the real terms don't pull at your heart stings as much, DRUG ADDICTS, ALCOHOLICS & MISFITS AGAINST SOCIETY) the few that are there related to mental health or other reasons out of their control or out of their social economic ability are definitely the minority. I urge you to look at the greater of the good for the community of Thurston County and over all Washington State and come up with other solutions rater then house them by a food bank and a methadone clinic just further making less motivation for them to get their act together to be a functional member of society. What services will be provided to help the ones that do want out of that lifestyle...even if it is the minority? Are job training, drug and alcohol, education, housing, etc. Options going to be readily available to these people? Are there some requirements going to be placed to allow these people to remain on this site? How will law enforcement be involved? Wondering what the expense is going to be to the tax payers, not only monetarily? The property taxes, sales tax, etc. continue to raise making it more difficult to make do with what we do have left at the end of a paycheck to take care of our own families and households. Now we are also expected to just accept the "homeless", as our new neighbors in the masses. Think about how this influences the youth that see this and how this builds their ideas of what is acceptable behavior. Personally I moved to Lacey from Centralia 10 years ago to enjoy the diversity, atmosphere of the downtown & walking trails... none of which I feel safe enjoying any longer. I'm very sad to see my safety and tax dollars going down the drain! Sincerely, Athena Thomas Sent from my Verizon Motorola Droid



Page 1/8


Chapter 16.64

HOMELESS ENCAMPMENTS1EMERGENCY HOUSING FACILITIES (DRAFT)

Sections:


16.64.015 Who may apply

16.64.020 Applicable procedures

16.64.030 Requirements for approval

16.64.040 Community development director’s decision

16.64.050 Requirements upon approval

16.64.0460 Fire, safety, and health

16.64.050 Community and economic development director’s decision

16.64.0670 Limitations

16.64.0780 Revocation

16.64.090 Proof of insurance

16.64.08100 Emergency shelters

16.64.110090 Severability


A. "Emergency housing facility" means temporary emergency housing that may include tents, vehicles and small

structures not on a permanent foundation organized and managed as temporary accommodations for homeless

persons, and may be hosted by a faith-based organization, not-for-profit organization, or a unit of government.

For purposes of this section, a "not-for-profit" shall mean an organization duly incorporated in the State of

Washington and recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as an IRC 501 (c)(3) charitable organization.

B. "Host agency" means a faith-based organization, or a not-for-profit organization, or a unit of government which

owns or controls the property or has an ownership interest in the property that is the subject of an application for an

Emergency Housing Facility Permit for providing basic services and support to temporary emergency housing

facility residents, such as hot meals and coordination of other needed donations and services.

Ownership interest shall include an interest by recorded title or by fully executed lease of the subject property.

C. "Sponsoring agency" means the host agency or another agency that assists the host agency and that joins in an

application with a host agency for an emergency housing facility permit and assumes responsibility for providing

basic services and support to emergency housing facility residents, such as hot meals, social services, sanitation,

hygiene, storage of belongings, trash and refuse collection, and coordination of other needed donations and services.

D. “Temporary” means lasting for only a limited period of time; not permanent.

16.64.0150 Who may apply.

Homeless encampmentsEmergency housing facilities shall be permitted only as an accommodation of a religious

faith-based organizationexercise by a host agency and sponsoring agency, or by a unit of government, or by a not-

for-profit organization. Each host agency and sponsoring agency shall jointly apply for a permit under this section

and shall certify compliance with all applicable requirements for approval and conditions of this chapter and the

application. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §5, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.020 Applicable procedures.

An emergency housing facility homeless encampment permit is an administrative determination as identified in

Section 1C.030 (Limited Administrative Review) of the City of Lacey Development Guidelines and Public Works

Standards. In addition to the requirements for administrative determinations found in Section 1C.030 of the

Development Guidelines and Public Works Standards the following additional procedures apply:

A. Advance Notice Required. The host agency and sponsoring agency shall notify the city of the proposed

emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment a minimum of thirty days in advance of the proposed date of



Page 2/8


establishment for the emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment. The advance notification shall contain the

following information:

1. Date. The date the emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment intends to begin operation;

2. Length. The length of time expected for operation;

3. Residents. The maximum number of residents proposed;

4. Location. The host location;

5. Host and sponsoring agency Nnames. The name of the host agency; and

6. Site Plan. The location, dimensions, and layout of the encampment on site.The manner in which the

emergency housing facility will comply with the requirements of this chapter.

B. North Thurston Public Schools Notified. Upon receipt of an application the director shall send a copy of the

application to the administrative offices of the North Thurston Public Schools for its review and consideration.

CB. Public Meeting Required. The host agency and/or sponsoring agency shall conduct at least one public

information meeting within or as close as possible to the locationneighborhood where the proposed emergency

housing facilityhomeless encampment will be located. The meeting shall be held a minimum of fourteen days prior

to the issuance of the temporary use permit administrative approval. The time and location of the meeting shall be

agreed upon between the city and host agency and/or sponsoring agency. All property owners and all organizations,

businesses, or persons that lease/rent property within three five hundred feet of the proposed homeless

encampmentemergency housing facility site shall be notified by mail by the host agency and/or sponsoring agency a

minimum of fourteen days in advance of the meeting. In lieu of notice by mail, an alternative means of notice may

be provided that is reasonably calculated to notify the neighboring property owners within five hundred feet of the

facility.Notification may be by mail, phone, or personal contact.

DC. Signs Required. In addition to the notification described above, tThe applicant shall also provide notice of

the application by posting two signs or placards on the site, or in a location immediately adjacent to the site, that

provide visibility to motorists using adjacent streets. Timing for placing signs shall coincide with other notification

requirements described above. The director of community and economic development shall establish standards for

size, color, layout, design, placement, and timing of installation and removal of the signs or placards.

E. Plan for Reporting Transition Results. Included in the application shall be a plan for reporting the results of

transitioning residents to permanent housing. The plan shall provide for a review of how long residents needed to

use the camp for housing and when residents graduated to permanent housing or left the camp for other temporary

housing. The intent shall be to have this information to consider the success of the encampment in handling

residents’ housing needs on a temporary basis and providing a hand up for the purpose of finding more permanent

housing opportunities. This information may be used by the council in considering the longevity and continuation of

the homeless shelter ordinance. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §6, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5,

2008).

16.64.030 Criteria/rRequirements for approval.

The community and economic development director or designee may issue a temporary and revocable permit for a

homeless encampmentemergency housing facility subject to the following criteria and requirements:

A. Site Criteria.

1. Ownership. The host agency shall submit documentation that it owns or has a leasehold interest in the

subject property;

2. Size. The property must be sufficient in size to accommodate the residents and, for outside encampments,

must have necessary on-site facilities including but not limited to the following:

a. Food tent and host tent;



Page 3/8


ba. Sanitary toilets in the number required to meet capacity guidelines located such that no odors shall

be detectable from exterior property lines;

cb. Hand washing facilities by the toilets and by any food areas; and

dc. Refuse receptacles; and.

d. Lockable storage of personal belongings.

3. Water Source. The host agency shall provide an adequate water source to the homeless

encampmentemergency housing facility as approved by the city.

4. Sensitive Areas. No homeless encampmentemergency housing facility shall be located within a sensitive

or critical area or its buffer as defined under LMC Title 14.

5. Permanent Structures. No new permanent structures shall be constructed for the homeless encampment.

65. Limitation on Residents. No more than forty residents shall be allowed. The city may further limit the

number of residents as site conditions dictate.

76. Parking. Adequate on-site parking shall be provided for the homeless encampmentemergency housing

facility. No off-site parking will be allowed. The estimated number of vehicles used by the emergency housing

facility residents shall be provided in the permit application. Parking space for the number of vehicles used by

homeless encampment residents and staff shall be provided. If the homeless encampmentemergency housing

facility is located on a site with another use, it shall be shown that the emergency housing facilityhomeless

encampment will not create an undue shortage of on-site parking for the other use(s) on the property. A host

agency or sponsoring agency may allow overnight occupancy of vehicles. Residents within vehicles are

subject to the same requirements of this chapter as those located within the emergency housing facility.

87. Public Transportation. Whenever possible, tThe emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment

shallould be located within a quarter mile of a bus stop with service seven days per week. If not located within

a quarter mile of a bus stop, the host agency or sponsoring agency must demonstrate the ability for residents to

obtain access to the nearest public transportation stop (such as carpools or shuttle buses).

98. Screening. The emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment shall be adequately buffered and

screened to be site obscuring from adjacent right-of-way and residential properties. Screening shall be a

minimum height of six feet and may include, but is not limited to, a combination of fencing, landscaping, or the

placement of the emergency housing facilityhomeless encampment behind buildings. The type of screening

shall be approved by the city.

109. Privacy for Sanitary Facilities. All sanitary portable toilets shall be screened from adjacent properties

and rights-of-way. The type of screening shall be approved by the city and may include, but is not limited to, a

combination of fencing and/or landscaping.

11. Distance Requirements to Sensitive Land Uses. Because a homeless encampment is a non-traditional

living arrangement and therefore provides less privacy and more complex living arrangements than traditional

homes, a distance requirement that provides visual separation and buffering from other sensitive land use

activities is considered appropriate. To satisfy this concern, no shelter shall be permitted within three hundred

feet of a licensed child daycare facility or any public or private pre-school or elementary, middle, or high

school. However, in the event that a daycare or school is located within the property of a potential host agency,

this requirement may be waived by the director if the owner of the daycare or school principal agrees to the

waiving of the distance requirement.

B. Security.

1. Operations and Security Plan. An operations and security plan for the homeless encampmentemergency

housing facility shall be submitted to the city at the time of application. The security plan shall address

potential security and neighborhood impacts within five hundred feet of the emergency housing facility site.



Page 4/8


2. Code of Conduct. The host agency shall ensure that the homeless encampmentemergency housing facility

has an enforceable code of conduct to be enforced by the host agency which, at a minimum, prohibits alcohol,

nonprescribed illegal drugs, weapons, violence, littering on the emergency housing facility site or in the

surrounding neighborhood, noise in excess of the limits set forth in LMC 16.57.030, and open fires. The code

of conduct should also address any other issues related to camp and neighborhood safety. A copy of the code of

conduct shall be submitted to the city at the time of application.

3. In addition to the above standards, the host agency or sponsoring agency may adopt and enforce

additional code of conduct conditions not otherwise inconsistent with this section.

C. Accommodating the Homeless Encampment Residents Indoors. In cases where the host agency and the camp

residents determine it is practical or necessary to accommodate the camp inside existing church structures, the

church shall have the option of making such a request to the city. Upon receiving a request to host the camp inside

of existing buildings, the community development director or designee may issue a temporary and revocable permit

for an indoor encampment subject to the following criteria and requirements:

1. Compliance with Building Codes. An indoor encampment shall comply with the requirements of the

city’s building codes. However, pursuant to RCW 19.27.042, the building official shall have the authority to

exempt code deficiencies so long as such deficiencies pose no threat to human life, health, or safety.








f. All applicable health standards for providing and using such facilities shall be satisfied as required

by the health department. (Ord. 1410 §§1 (part), 3, 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1327 §1, 2009; Ord.

1326 §7, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.040 Community development director’s decision.

The community development director shall review the proposal for compliance with the provisions of this chapter

and all other applicable law. Said review shall ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city are

preserved, and shall provide an expedient and reasonable land use review process for decisions and interpretations of

this chapter. The director may modify the submittal requirement as deemed appropriate. The director shall notify the

host agency of his or her decision to approve, modify, or deny the application within a timely manner, but not prior

to fourteen days after the public meeting. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.050 Requirements upon approval.

4. A. Sign Agreement. All homeless encampmentemergency housing facility residents must sign an

agreement to abide by the code of conduct. Failure to do so shall result in the noncompliant resident’s

immediate and permanent expulsion from the property.

5. B. Log. The host or sponsoring agency shall keep a log of all people persons who stay overnight in

the emergency housing facilityencampment. The log shall include names, birth dates, and dates of stay. Logs

shall be retainedkept a minimum of six monthsone year.

6C. Identification. The host or sponsoring agency shall take all reasonable and legal steps to obtain require

verifiable government-issued photo identification ID of prospective and current encampment emergency

housing facility residents. Acceptable forms of ID include a driver’s license, government issued identification

card, military identification, or passport. Replacement of lost ID can be facilitated through an appropriate



Page 5/8


advocacy center. Photo ID is necessary to verify one’s identity and to apply for services, housing, and

employment. If verifiable photo ID cannot be obtained, the individual must agree to be fingerprinted or will not

be admitted to the camp.

7. D. Warrant and Sex Offender Status Check. The host or sponsoring agency shall engage the Lacey

police department to use the photo identification to check for outstanding in-state and out-of-state warrants and

registered sex offender status. When necessary, the Lacey police department will provide fingerprinting

services. The Lacey police department shall provide background checks and fingerprinting services at no charge

to the host agency.

a. 1. Outstanding Warrants. If said warrant check reveals an existing or outstanding warrant from

any jurisdiction in the United States, the host agency the host or sponsoring agency may reject the subject

of the check for residency in the emergency housing facility or may eject the subject of the check if that

person is already an emergency housing facility resident and will immediately report the finding to the

Lacey police department for apprehension of the subject individual.

b2. Sex Offender Status. If the check reveals the applicant to be a registered sex offender required to

register with the County Sheriff or their county of residence pursuant to RCW 9A.44.130, the host or

sponsoring agency may reject the subject of the check for residency in the emergency housing facility or

may eject the subject of the check if that person is already an emergency housing facility resident and will

immediately report the finding to the Lacey police department. the individual shall not be admitted to the

camp.

CE. Security. The host or sponsoring agency shall ensure the encampment emergency housing facility is secure

and managed to strictly prohibit alcohol, illegal drugs, weapons, fighting, abuse of any kind, littering, or disturbing

the neighbors while located on the property. As necessary, the Lacey police department will be available to enforce

state and local laws.

DF. Entrance/Host Tent. The host or sponsoring agency shall ensure there is an entrance/host tent that is manned

twenty-four hours a day seven days a week. The entrance may be staffed by a volunteer, encampment resident, host

agency committee member, or other responsible person.

G. On-Call Committee Member. The host or sponsoring agency will appoint a designated n executive committee

member to serve on call and be available for the entrance person “on duty” emergency housing facility manager at

all times. The on-call committee member shall be available to provide help and assistance to the person manning the

entrance as may be necessary to ensure the encampment functions properly.

H. Enforcement. The on-duty responsible person staffing the entrance shall notify the on-call committee member

as necessary in the enforcement of encampment rules and expectations, and/or the Lacey police department as

necessary to enforce local and state laws. Said representativesponsible person shall also serve as a point of contact

for the Lacey police department, and will orient the department on how the entrance operates. The names of the on-

duty responsible person(s) representative will be posted daily at the entrance. The city shall provide contact numbers

of nonemergency personnel which shall be posted at the entrance.

EI. Visitors. Visitors to the encampment emergency housing facility must meet the following procedures and

requirements:

1. Visitors to the encampment emergency housing facility must be invited by a resident, host agency, or

sponsoring agency and must be able to show picture ID.

2. Visitors must be accompanied by the resident that invited the visitor while at the encampmentemergency

housing facility.

3. Visitors may be at the encampment emergency housing facility only between the hours of 97:00 a.m. and

10:00 p.m.



Page 6/8


4. Visitors may not stay overnight unless they get permission from the host and complete the same

background check requirements as required for residents.

FJ. Age Restrictions. Residents of the emergency housing facilityencampment must be at least eighteen years of

age. No minors are permitted entrance to the emergency housing facilityencampment unless they are related to a

camp resident. Minors related to a camp resident may visit the encampment emergency housing facility during the

day. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §8, 2009.)

G. Entry program. Residents of the emergency housing facility should be placed through a coordinated entry

program.

16.64.0460 Fire, safety, and health.

Tent encampmentsThe emergency housing facility shall meet the following fire, safety, and health requirements:

A. Fire Safety. The homeless encampmentemergency housing facility shall conform to the following

requirements:

1. Open Fires. Within individual tents there shall be no open fires for cooking or heatingOpen fires are

prohibited. All fires shall adhere to the regulations of the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency;

2. Heating Appliances. No heating appliances within the individual tents units are allowed unless approved

by the building official;.

3. Cooking. A common tent may provide community cooking facilities and services for the camp, but only

if approved by the host agency and the health department. No cooking appliances are allowed within individual

tents of residents;

4. Fire Extinguishers. An adequate number and appropriate rating of fire extinguishers shall be provided as

approved by the fire department;

5. Emergency Access. Adequate access for the fire and emergency medical apparatus shall be provided.

This shall be determined by the fire marshal;

6. Separation. Adequate separation between tents and other structures shall be maintained as determined by

the fire marshal; and

7. Electrical Service. Electrical service shall be in accordance with recognized and accepted practice.

Electrical cords are not to be strung together and any cords used must be approved for exterior use.

B. Health. All necessary sanitary facilities including temporary sanitary portable toilets outhouses/port-a-potties

and facilities for hand washing shall be provided. All applicable health standards for providing and using such

facilities shall be satisfied as required by the health department.

C. Access for Inspections. The host agency shall permit inspections by city staff and the Thurston County health

department to ensure compliance with the conditions of this permit. Inspections shall occur at reasonable times, and

may occur without prior notice. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §9, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5,

2008).

D. Accommodating the Emergency Housing Facility Indoors. In cases where the host or sponsoring agency

determine it is practical or necessary to accommodate the facility inside existing structures, the host or sponsoring

agency shall have the option of making such a request to the city. Upon receiving a request to host the facility inside

of existing buildings, the community and economic development director or designee may issue a temporary and

revocable permit for an indoor emergency housing facility subject to the following criteria and requirements:

1. Compliance with Building Codes. An indoor emergency housing facility shall comply with the

requirements of the city’s building codes. However, pursuant to RCW 19.27.042, the building official shall have the

authority to exempt code deficiencies so long as such deficiencies pose no threat to human life, health, or safety.



Page 7/8









f. All applicable health standards for providing and using such facilities shall be satisfied as required by

the health department. (Ord. 1410 §§1 (part), 3, 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1327 §1, 2009; Ord. 1326 §7, 2009;

Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.050 Community and economic development director’s decision.

The community and economic development director shall review the proposal for compliance with the provisions of

this chapter and all other applicable law. Said review shall ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the citizens

of the city are preserved, and shall provide an expedient and reasonable land use review process for decisions and

interpretations of this chapter. The director may modify the submittal requirement as deemed appropriate. The

director shall notify the host agency and sponsoring agency of his or her decision to approve, modify, or deny the

application within a timely manner, but not prior to fourteen days after the public meeting. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part),

2013: Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.0670 Limitations.

A. Duration. Duration of the homeless encampmentemergency housing facility shall not exceed one hundred

eighty daysyear and may be extended for two additional six-month extensions upon submittal of an application and

proof that the site did not have on-site criminal violations greater than the crime rate of the surrounding

neighborhood. The site may be approved for a duration longer than two years upon approval of a conditional use

permit pursuant to LMC 16.66.

B. Parcel Limitation. No host agency shall host an emergency housing facility homeless encampment more than

one time in any twelvetwenty-four-month period, beginning on the date the homeless encampment emergency

housing facility locates on a parcel of property.

C. Number Limitation. No more than one homeless encampment may be located in the city at any time. (Ord.

1410 §§1 (part), 4, 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §10, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.0780 Revocation.

A. If the host agency or sponsoring agency failsUpon determination that there has been a violation of any

approval criteria or condition of application or that the host agency has failed to take action against a resident who

violates the terms and conditions of the permit or has committed violence, it may result in immediate termination of

the permit issued to the host agency or sponsoring agency. If the City learns of acts of violence by residents of the

emergency housing facility and the Host Agency or Sponsoring Agency has not adequately addressed the situation

to protect residents, the permit may be immediately terminated.

B. Upon determination that that has been a violation of any approval criteria or condition of application, the

director of community and economic development may give written notice to the permit holder describing the

alleged violation. Within fourteen days of the mailing of notice of violation, the permit holder shall show cause why

the permit shall not be revoked. At the end of the fourteen-day period, the director shall sustain or revoke the permit.

When an temporary homeless encampmentemergency housing facility permit is revoked, the director shall notify the

permit holder by certified mail of the revocation and the findings upon which the revocation is based. Appeals of

decisions to revoke an temporary homeless encampmentemergency housing facility permit shall be to Thurston

County Superior Court. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326 §11, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).



Page 8/8


16.64.090 Proof of insurance.

The host agency shall show proof of general liability insurance with minimum limits of one million dollars per

occurrence. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.08100 Emergency shelters.

The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to emergency or cold weather shelters where the screening of

individuals to be temporarily housed in such shelters is conducted by anthe Eemergency Sshelter Nnetwork or a

religious organization providing the emergency shelter. (Ord. 1410 §1 (part), 2013: Ord. 1346 §1, 2010; Ord. 1326

§12, 2009; Ord. 1307 §5, 2008).

16.64.110090 Severability.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or other portion of this chapter, or its application to any person,

is for any reason declared invalid in whole or in part by any court or agency of competent jurisdiction, said decision

shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. (Ord. 1410 §5, 2013).

1 Editor’s Note: The following sections were added to the end of Ordinance 1307, passed by the Lacey City Council on April 24,

2008. Section 6: Emergency Shelters. The provisions of this Ordinance shall not apply to emergency or cold weather shelters

where the screening of individuals to be temporarily housed in such shelters is conducted by the Emergency Shelter Network or a

religious organization providing the emergency shelter. Section 7: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,

phrase, or other portion of this Ordinance, or its application to any person, is for any reason declared invalid in whole or in part

by any court or agency of competent jurisdiction, said decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof.

Section 8: Longevity. This ordinance shall be in effect for a duration of one year after adoption and shall terminate thereafter.

Prior to termination the Council may decide to review the effectiveness of this ordinance in providing an alternative temporary

housing opportunity for the homeless population. The Council may utilize the tracking information provided pursuant to LMC

16.64.020(E) in this review. Based upon the Council’s review it may decide to continue this ordinance and re-adopt it or let it

expire.

Additional associated amendments:

Repeal: LMC 16.06.375: Host Agency definition

LMC 16.06.372: Homeless Encampment definition

Amend: LMC 16.06.676: Religious Organization definition

16.06.676 Religious organization.

“Religious organization” means organizations and institutions developed for the purposes of religious exercise and considered

protected under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Particularly relevant in the context of the

ordinance codified in this section is a religious organization whose religious activities and beliefs typically include providing

basic needs such as homeless encampmentsemergency housing, shelters, meals, and assistance to the poor and needy. (Ord. 1539

§53, 2019: Ord. 691 §6, 1984).

agenda lacey planning commission meeting tuesday, …...jul 02, 2019 · mark mininger, shaunesy...

Documents