Fewer limits sought on tent cities

OLYMPIA — Cities and counties could place fewer restrictions on temporary homeless encampments hosted on church property, under a bill now being considered by the Legislature.

But even supporters of the legislation say state and federal laws already limit how much local governments can regulate church activities.

Rep. Brendan Williams, D-Olympia, said the proposal he is sponsoring is targeted at cities like Lacey, Thurston County, which last year forbid a homeless camp from being set up outdoors.

Court challenges were filed over similar encampments, called tent cities, in Mercer Island and Woodinville. The Woodinville case is still awaiting a ruling by the state Supreme Court.

"If we're going to deny the abilities of the faith-based community to serve the homeless, who else is going to service these folks?" Williams asked Wednesday.

The measure, House Bill 1956, has passed the House and is expected to be heard before the Senate Committee on Human Services & Corrections on Friday.

Neighbors often complain that tent cities are an eyesore and pose a danger to the area.

Williams said he also opposed tent cities until his own church hosted a trouble-free homeless camp.

Under the proposed legislation, cities and counties couldn't: interfere with church decisions about housing the homeless, regulate tent cities based on their proximity to a school or day-care facility, or require churches to obtain liability insurance to host tent cities. Local governments also couldn't keep churches from hosting homeless encampments outdoors.

Bill Kirlin-Hackett, director of the interfaith task force on homelessness, testified in support of Williams' bill last month. Kirlin-Hackett said the proposal has good intentions but isn't necessary to ensure the survival of church-based tent cities.

"We haven't put a ton of energy in this bill because we have federal law and we have precedent on our side," Kirlin-Hackett said. "It's not crucial, but it helps. It simply makes it [federal law and legal precedent] clearer to cities."

Seattle attorney Greg Rubstello, who represents the city of Woodinville in the Supreme Court case, believes the bill creates an unnecessary layer of regulations.

"We already have our state and federal constitutions that restrict government regulation of religious activity and federal legislation that prohibits cities and counties from putting undue burdens on religious activity on their local regulation," Rubstello said. "How much regulation should there be?"

Rubstello said the gist of his argument before the Supreme Court last May was that Northshore United Church of Christ did not have the proper permits to host Tent City 4 in the summer of 2006.

Mercer Island residents tried to thwart Tent City 4 from moving into their neighborhood last summer, arguing the camp at the Mercer Island United Methodist Church would be a nuisance and a danger.

In July, a King County Superior Court judge said the residents did not establish the facts necessary to win an injunction.

In Seattle, a homeless camp made headlines last year with hot-pink tents and the fact that it was dubbed "Nickelsville," after Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels. Initially, the camp illegally pitched its 150 tents on city-owned land; it moved to a church near the University of Washington late last year.

The Association of Washington Cities and many Republicans oppose Williams' bill.

Rep. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, Whatcom County, said the Legislature shouldn't get in the middle of local property-use issues.

"Nobody here is against allowing churches to carry out their missions," Ericksen said. "We should allow local governments to make the decisions that are in the best interests of their people."

Jennifer Sullivan: 360-236-8267 or jensullivan@seattletimes.com