Bill would impose Seattle-style encampments onto every Washington community

New legislation authored by seven-term State Representative Mia Gregerson (D – Sea-Tac), would prohibit local governments from enforcing their anti-camping and loitering laws unless they navigate a series of nearly impossible state requirements. It would effectively return cities to the frustrating period before the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Grants Pass v Johnson in June 2024, when homelessness encampments dominated many communities’ public spaces.

If HB 2489 becomes law, communities such as Bellevue and Marysville, which have effectively kept encampments from growing within their borders, would be forced to end their successful methods. The legislation would require them to instead act like Seattle did during the pandemic by allowing sprawling encampments and broken-down RVs to take over sidewalks, parks, and green spaces.

Cities like Burien, which were previously prevented from removing the large encampments where drug overdoses and fires were regular occurrences until the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Grants Pass, will again be forced to allow tents, makeshift structures, and abandoned vehicles in their open spaces if this bill becomes law.

The bill requires cities to provide “adequate alternative shelter” before removing encampments. This is defined as providing for all disabilities, as well as accommodating all pets and partners and must be within the borders of the city.  Redmond Police Chief Darrell Lowe testified last week, “I don’t believe there is any shelter system in Washington that would meet these standards.”

This will have a devastating impact on the quality of life in many Washington State communities as kids will not be able to enjoy parks, litter and garbage will grow in and around the encampments, and customers will no longer visit certain businesses due to safety concerns.  Among the reasons why working-class families are fleeing Seattle is to escape the city’s worsening homelessness and drug crises. Yet, those who have moved to smaller Washington communities will now have those issues imposed upon them if this bill passes.

It is also troubling that by stopping local communities from enforcing their camping bans, this legislation will remove the most effective tool authorities use to convince homeless individuals to accept the treatment they desperately need.

Local officials often use the threat of relocation or jail time as an incentive to the individual to receive addiction and/or mental health treatment. Surveys of homeless individuals find that between 65% to 80% admit or self-diagnose themselves as a regular drug user and/or having mental issues. The real figure is likely even larger.

Once free from drugs and alcohol or receiving appropriate mental health management, the person is no longer dependent on expensive government programs, and they can become active and productive members of their community.

This is not the first time Representative Gregerson has sought to make it more difficult for local communities to decide their own homeless strategy. Last year, she sponsored a bill (HB 1380) that sought to establish a set of unique rights for those who are homeless. That legislation would have required local governments to battle numerous expensive legal procedures to remove dangerous encampments.  City officials from across Washington fought back against the bill and it never made it to the House floor for a vote.

This year’s battle over HB 2489 is the latest debate between the two sides on the homelessness issue.

One side is dominated by progressive politicians and those who benefit from the implementation of Housing First programs . They minimize the value of drugs and alcohol abstinence and instead seek to build a large, expensive housing bureaucracy and create more dependence on wasteful and ineffective government services. They strongly supported the current homelessness strategy that resulted in a 68% increase in homelessness in King County during the past decade (since it was declared an emergency in 2015) and an 80% increase in Washington State since 2013 (causing Washington to have the largest chronic homelessness number in the country).

They have already spent billions constructing large wasteful bureaucracies and on “low-barrier” housing, including the $455 million Dow Constantine spent to buy hotels around King County to warehouse 1366 homeless persons (many still active in their addictions) at a cost of $333,000 per person.

The side that supports a treatment-based approach has broader support along the political spectrum, from moderate Democrats to conservative Republicans. It is advocated by many with experience of being homeless and those who work to end the suffering that continues to grow on our streets.

The treatment-based strategy seeks to move funds into recovery programs instead of long-term low-barrier housing. Treatment-based advocates determine success not by how many people become dependent on government services, but in how many people overcome addictions and mental health issues to no longer suffer from homelessness and become productive members of our society.