San Rafael considers revised rules for homeless campers

San Rafael’s ordinance governing homeless campers could be relaxed under a proposed amendment aimed at complying with a federal court order.

The ordinance, which restricts where the camps are allowed and how much space they can occupy, has been the subject of a legal battle that started last summer.

A preliminary injunction set limitations on the reach of the city’s ordinance, making it challenging for city officials to enforce the camping laws they say are for the health and public safety.

On Monday, the City Council will consider a proposal that erases the original requirement to space camping areas 200 feet apart, and instead enforce only a 10-foot buffer around each site.

The amendment would prohibit camping within 250 feet of schools, and it would permit campsites of up to 200 square feet for a single person and up to 400 square feet for up to four people living together.

“Over the last seven months, the City has worked to implement the direction of the Court in its Preliminary Injunction Order,” John Stefanski, assistant city manager, said in an email on Friday. “The learnings from these efforts have informed the ordinance revisions the City Council will consider on Monday.”

The amended regulation would also set time, place and manner restrictions, including a 10-foot setback from public utility infrastructure and private property.

“This new setback will serve as an important safety measure for all by ensuring adequate access and fire fuel breaks,” Stefanski said.

The City Council originally approved the ordinance in July as a way to curb a trend of violence, crime, littering and threats against public safety, city officials said.

A month later, a group of homeless residents filed a lawsuit in federal court. The plaintiffs live at the camp on city property along the Mahon Creek Path between Andersen Drive and Francisco Boulevard West. Some living there have dubbed the site “Camp Integrity.”

The plaintiffs, who are represented by the local chapter of the California Homeless Union, argued the original ordinance is unconstitutional and violates the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishment clause. They allege the ordinance criminalizes homelessness.

Anthony Prince, a California Homeless Union attorney participating in the San Rafael lawsuit, said the two side left an all-day settlement session at loggerheads last month.

“Unfortunately, it did not produce a settlement,” he said.

Regarding the new proposal, he said, “we’re very concerned.” Prince said the 10-foot setback and buffer rules will push camps closer to the street, where they are increased risk of harm.

“We had a chance to make real progress, but it seems to us that the city is backtracking,” Prince said. “We’re going to fight if we have to, but we hope to come to some agreement going forward.”

Robbie Powelson, an advocate for the plaintiffs, said “the proposed ordinance would constructively evict dozens of residents in the Mahon Creek area and endanger lives.”

“It would break the promises residents have relied on in establishing homesteads, because many places the city currently says are OK to live on would suddenly become illegal,” Powelson said.

City officials have partnered with the county to hire a case manager to work exclusively with the Mahon Creek path residents. The case manager can handle up to 17 clients, according to the city.

Stefanski said city and county officials visited residents at the site this week to connect them with services.

“We continue to focus on providing a compassionate response to homelessness by addressing its root causes through housing and services and are working to expand efforts toward both interim and long-term solutions,” Stefanski said.

Mayor Kate Colin said San Rafael , like many cities in California, has seen an increase of encampments in recent years. The city has data showing that large encampments result in increased calls for fire and police response, demonstrating that they are not safe for the occupants, she said.

“In response to this health and safety concern, the city has passed numerous ordinances and it is unfortunate that the city has been sued in federal court every single time,” Colin said.

“I am optimistic that this time will be different,” she said, noting that the amended ordinance has been designed with the court order in mind. “We all want the same thing here, which is helping people get from the streets into housing, and the city believes this ordinance will be an important tool to achieve that objective.”