The American Civil Liberties Union of Washington (ACLU-WA) on Monday, Jan. 27, 2025 called on the Burien City Council to reject an ordinance that would criminalize public camping and storage on city property.
In a letter sent to the council on Monday, the organization expressed significant concerns over the ordinance’s potential impacts on the city’s homeless population.
Ordinance No. 864 – which was approved by a 5–2 vote at Monday’s council meeting – aims to amend sections of the Burien Municipal Code, does not require the availability of shelter or supportive services before enforcement, a provision the ACLU described as “inhumane and legally problematic.”
“The proposed ordinance fails to address the root causes of homelessness and instead opts for punitive measures that disproportionately impact vulnerable individuals,” wrote Jazmyn Clark, Smart Justice Policy Program Director at ACLU-WA. “Criminalizing homelessness does not solve the problem; it merely pushes it out of sight and exacerbates suffering.”
The ordinance’s proponents have referenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which upheld regulations against camping on public property. However, the ACLU argues that the ruling does not give local governments blanket authority to criminalize homelessness without addressing the availability of shelter or services.
In the letter, the ACLU outlined alternative solutions, urging city leaders to invest in affordable housing, increase shelter capacity, and provide comprehensive mental health and job training services.
“Punishing individuals for circumstances beyond their control is both unjust and ineffective,” Clark added. “We strongly urge the Burien City Council to adopt compassionate measures that uphold the dignity and rights of all community members.”
By a vote of 5–2, the Burien City Council approved the ordinance at Monday’s meeting.
Full Text of Letter
“Re: Concerns Regarding Proposed Ordinance No. 864
“Dear Burien City Councilmembers,
“We write today because the ACLU of Washington (ACLU-WA) has received concerns from constituents about Ordinance No. 864, a proposal to amend BMC 9.85.150 and 10.15.100. We have significant concerns about the implication of this ordinance on the civil rights and dignity of our unhoused community members and urge you to not adopt this proposal.
“The proposed ordinance seeks to criminalize public camping and storage on public property, without requiring the availability of shelter or services. This approach is not only inhumane but also legally problematic. The ordinance’s reliance on the recent Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson is misplaced and fails to consider the unique circumstances and legal context of Burien.
“The City of Grants Pass decision upheld the enforcement of generally applicable laws regulating camping on public property, ruling that such enforcement does not constitute “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment. However, this decision should not be interpreted as a blanket endorsement of all anti-camping ordinances, especially those that do not consider the availability of shelter or the specific needs of the homeless population.
“In Grants Pass, the Supreme Court emphasized that local governments have the authority to regulate public spaces to ensure public safety and order. However, the Court also acknowledged the need for humane and reasonable approaches to homelessness. The decision does not mandate the criminalization of homelessness, nor does it absolve local governments of their responsibility to provide adequate shelter and services.
“The proposed ordinance in Burien fails to address the root causes of homelessness and instead opts for punitive measures that disproportionately impact vulnerable individuals. Criminalizing homelessness does not solve the problem; it merely pushes it out of sight and exacerbates the suffering of those already in dire circumstances.
“Moreover, the ordinance’s lack of requirement for shelter availability before enforcement is particularly troubling. This approach is inconsistent with the principles of justice and fairness. It is well-documented that many individuals experiencing homelessness face significant barriers to accessing shelter, including mental health issues, substance use disorder, and the lack of available beds. Punishing them for circumstances beyond their control is both unjust and ineffective.
“Rather than adopting punitive measures, we urge the City Council to consider alternative solutions that address the underlying issues of homelessness. These include:
- “Increasing Shelter Capacity: Ensure that there are enough shelter beds to accommodate all individuals experiencing homelessness in Burien.
- “Supportive Services: Provide comprehensive services, including mental health care, substance abuse treatment, and job training, to help individuals transition out of homelessness.
- “Affordable Housing: Invest in affordable housing initiatives to provide long-term solutions for those in need.
“In conclusion, we strongly urge the Burien City Council to reject Ordinance No. 864. Instead, we encourage you to adopt compassionate and effective measures that address the root causes of homelessness and uphold the dignity and rights of all community members. Criminalizing homelessness is not the answer; providing support and resources is.
“Thank you for your attention to this critical issue. We are available to discuss this matter further and to collaborate on developing humane and effective solutions for our community.
“Sincerely,
“– Jazmyn Clark
“Smart Justice Policy Program Director
“American Civil Liberties Union of Washington“cc: Burien City Attorney Garmon Newsom II”
And where will the City of Burien find all this money to fund all these ideas, or should I say demands? It’s lost on the ACLU that Burien has every legal right to enact this and promote a way up and out of living in squalor, it’s also quite rich of the ACLU to say “circumstances beyond their control” like it’s everybody else’s fault you live in a tent. How is it that encouraging others to leave the streets thru contact, services and referalls not an appropriate step for those resistant to accept help? The ACLU thinks magic money thrown at the proven failures of the Homeless Industrial Complex will solve what it hasn’t yet and allowing outdoor camping is somehow sane reasoning.
@Louie G, Exactly!
This type of structure for the homeless written by the ACLU-WA is one of the main reasons why homelessness has been strengthened over the recent years, it’s another soft handed, coddling approach for strengthening homelessness.
You claim to say in your letter “Criminalizing homelessness is wrong” but I’d love for you to describe how someone can literally say “O I’m homeless now”, then proceeds to defecate on public sidewalks, smoke crack/drugs on public sidewalks in front of police, commit all sorts of nefarious activity, pitch tents on public sidewalks blocking paths, run into nearby retail stores and constantly steal multiple items and walk out to boost/eat, then panhandle for more money, and repeat the cycle everyday.
REMEMBER though, “I’m homeless” so I should be able to get away with this criminal live style with no consequences? Why is it that a citizen that’s not homeless can’t get away with doing those things, are there different laws for the homeless now? Can anyone claim there homeless for a few days or hours to do their dirty work? (Imagine if international drug dealers claimed they were just homeless to bypass/hide, o shoot…. they already have for years now. But make sure to donate to them – ACLU)
How very, very sad to read the terrible comments left so far. But they all come down to “no one is homeless without it being their fault” and “My money is mine and I shouldn’t be forced to help ANYONE ELSE”. But when each of these people have expensive problems, do they fix them on their own? No! They go running to family, friends, and neighbors and use guilt to convince them to help.
This is greedy and inhumane thinking. And it doesn’t belong in our community.
P.S.: did the above commenters know that it takes almost TWICE their money to pay for jail for homeless than it does to help them?
More like we get the right leaders hired and a new structured system in place instead of the our current, washed out, coddling system that has only made the homeless problem worse. Homelessness is directly tied to the environment/economy of the state and governing within it… why are only blue states on the top of US with overwhelming amounts of homelessness? (part of the answer is there)
Owning a home or not owning a home doesn’t = actively doing drugs, committing theft, panhandling, having a lack of morals and refusing outside help… that’s a different issue entirely. (no consequences) Also, there’s an obvious distinction between those who are genuinely trying to better their situation and those who seem to be caught in a cycle that doesn’t encourage change. Mental illness and addiction certainly plays a majority role in many people’s homelessness. Current systems are not effective at all in addressing the root causes, and they seem to enable the lifestyle rather than change it. There is a lack of repercussions in these situations, we need to balance helping people who are struggling and want help VS the people who aren’t trying to improve their lives but are held accountable for their actions.
For those who refuse help or engage in criminal behaviors like theft, or illegal activity we need a system where there are clear, consistent consequences. Whether it’s treatment, or a structured homeless community service program (use the homeless to fix the homeless), a 3-strike rule, jail or enforcing stricter laws about theft, there has to be a balance between offering help and holding individuals accountable for harmful behaviors.
Social workers, outreach teams, cities and law enforcement need to work together. In some cases, people experiencing homelessness might need a gentle intervention, but in other cases, law enforcement might be necessary to address criminal behavior. That said, the goal should always be to help individuals get the care they need while also ensuring public safety and order. Regardless, the current way of governing homelessness in this state needs to be challenged and re-structured.
It’s totally lost on you the concept of personal responsibility and that actions have consequences, every time you speak of the plight of those addicted or plagued with mental illness you always make it society’s fault. It’s rather tiresome to have you or others drone on about it every Council meeting about how it’s up to the City to solve and money is the cure, when actually no it’s not. If someone just refuses to accept help do we follow your message of affirmation and hand holding and let them wither, or do we break the cycle you think they have a right to and actually help them.
And I’ll add to the cost of jail statement you made, nobody is going to jail unless you exhibit behavior that justifies it. Talking about money what about the ongoing cost of emergency responses to an OD, violence towards others, theft and public disorder that happens while they refuse to accept help, all those costs you seem to accept blindly and foolishly.
^^^