Last week, the city introduced a revised set of procedures for the removal of camps on city property. These procedures govern such things as identification of camps to be cleared, notification of campers and storage of their belongings after a camp has been cleared. City workers got an opportunity to flex these new policies last week as they cleared – for the second time – the camp along the Burke Gilman Trail. More on that later.
Wallingford is among perhaps a dozen or so neighborhoods in the city unwittingly playing “host” to homeless campers. Issues arising from this camping have been the subject of much discussion in the forums here on wallyhood, and a number of articles have appeared here. I recently wrote an article about the eviction of campers along the BGT and their subsequent return. Given the level of concern and interest, I thought it would be good to highlight some of the main points of this revised policy.
The guidelines give criteria to be used by city workers to prioritize camps for removal. These criteria are (in no particular order):
- objective hazards such as moving vehicles and steep slopes;
- criminal activity beyond illegal substance abuse;
- quantities of garbage, debris, or waste;
- other active health hazards to occupants or the surrounding neighborhood;
- difficulty in extending emergency services to the site;
- imminent work scheduled at the site for which the encampment will pose an obstruction;
- damage to the natural environment of environmentally critical areas; and
- the proximity of homeless individuals to uses of special concern including schools or facilities for the elderly
While these criteria protect the campers and workers removing them and address neighbors’ concerns about trash and illegal activity, I was surprised that citizen complaints don’t factor into whether a camp is high priority for removal or not.
The guidelines also provide for a special class of encampments known as Emphasis Areas. The city defines these areas as “… places where an encampment has become a consistent problem,” and further says, “…the area shall be inspected by the City at least once each day. The area shall be signed, and may be fenced.” A map of current Emphasis Areas reveals that most are located under I-5 (the areas known as The Jungle), but none are in Wallingford.
The revised policy delves into the details of conducting a camp removal. At least 72 hours of advance notice must be given to campers by means of a posting in English and Spanish as well as “any other language the City determines would further the purpose of the notice.” Oral notice must also be given if reasonably possible, and an outreach worker must visit the site prior to clean up. It is during the outreach visit, presumably, that the campers must be advised of alternative shelter or legal camping areas that are available to them. Provision must be made for the storage of campers’ property, and notices must be posted to advise them of how to reclaim that property.
With these new rules in hand, city workers moved in to clear the camp along the Burke Gilman last week. Reports on camp clearings, including the BGT clearing, are posted here. In reading through the BGT report, I was surprised to note that there were as many as 5 tents all apparently owned by a single person. As you can see from the photos, quite a few syringes were found in one of the tents while some sort of ammunition was recovered from another. To discourage further camping, workers pruned all the lower branches of the trees — a tactic that they have used elsewhere — although in this case, the pruning was pretty severe. It’s a shame, but it seems as though we’re having to decide between illegal camping and trees in some cases. The camp occupant was offered and accepted transitional housing (or perhaps I should say transitional “housing”) at an authorized encampment at Licton Springs (8620 Nesbit Ave N).
Thank you Mayor Murray, Mike O’Brien and Rob Johnson! You’re helping to keep Seattle safe and beautiful. More campers everywhere, ASAP!
A 72 hour warning? They are there illegally! And if the city had any common sense, they’d put up permanent signage after a sweep warning would be campers that new encampments would be IMMEDIATELY swept, and they’re stuff confiscated and destroyed. Putting up the signs would constitute the 72 hour warning.
And I’ve just read that Columbia Legal Services is suing the city on behalf of a homeless RV’er, arguing that when the city removes RV’s and even tents, it is violating a “homestead exemption law.” If successful, vagrants can camp on the street with the ensuing garbage in front of your home, and you can’t do a thing about it.
Maybe this is what HALA is really all about? The “Homeless Addict Littering Agenda?”
If anyone’s willing to admit to advanced gun knowledge, I’d be interested to know if that 9mm round (or whatever) is a hand load. Casual survey of images online led me to think it is – factory loads never seem to be plain lead like that, and that shape is apparently convenient to work with. Maybe it isn’t very interesting that the campers are packing home reloads – when you’re using stolen firearms, you can’t be too picky – but you know, lower cost rounds means you can afford to hit the shooting range more often and keep your skills up, which is a good thing … I guess.
I had not driven near the encampment referred to here. however today I moticed 3 tents under the freeway on 40th & 5th NE,, 2 blocks from JSIS school. Is this a new homeless site/
http://www.wallyhood.org/wallyhood-forums/topic/trespassers-under-freeway/#gsc.tab=0
This morning on way to work on 40th I was surprised to see one mro etent but also about 5 or 6 people sitting on chairs with 6 or so bikes standing up right by the street. On way home I saw at least 7 different city vehicles and all previous camp, tents bikes etc.. gone.