Salem, Ore. – As Oregon struggles with a persistent housing crisis, city officials across the state are calling for more flexibility to manage homeless encampments. A law passed in 2021 has become a focal point of controversy, with local leaders claiming it hampers their ability to address camps they consider problematic.
The League of Oregon Cities, representing municipal governments, announced its intention to make amending this law a key priority for the upcoming legislative session. The law currently restricts city policies on camping, requiring them to be “objectively reasonable,” a term not explicitly defined, thereby limiting enforcement options against encampments.
Efforts to amend the law are likely to receive bipartisan support. Democratic Sen. Mark Meek is expected to champion a bill that would reduce existing restrictions, a move that some Republicans endorse, criticizing the current state policy as a de facto “right-to-camp” law. However, any legislative push will likely encounter strong resistance from those who argue cities already possess adequate powers to deal with hazardous or criminally active camps.
Advocates for homeless individuals are pushing back against these proposed changes, warning that they could exacerbate conditions for Oregon’s vulnerable populations. They argue that the emphasis should instead be on increasing housing availability rather than displacing those with nowhere else to go. Sybil Hebb, the director of legislative advocacy at the Oregon Law Center, highlighted the broader implications, suggesting that shifting focus away from long-term housing solutions is detrimental to both the homeless and the community at large.
The legal landscape regarding anti-camping policies has been evolving both within Oregon and across the nation. Notably, the U.S. Supreme Court recently provided states and cities more leeway to regulate homeless encampments. This ruling came from a case involving an ordinance from Grants Pass, Oregon, which overturned previous federal appellate court decisions setting strict limits on such policies.
In response to the Supreme Court’s decision, states like California have taken actions to enforce clearances of homeless sites. Governor Gavin Newsom, for example, has directed state agencies to clear encampments on state land and threatened to withdraw state funding from cities that do not comply.
Oregon’s existing law, House Bill 3115, was spearheaded by then-legislator Tina Kotek to align city camping policies with federal standards. The bill was the result of comprehensive negotiations and was initially met with a neutral stance from the League of Oregon Cities. The 2021 law allows homeless residents to sue cities if they are unjustly targeted by camping policies that do not meet the ambiguous “objectively reasonable” standard.
While revisions to this policy are on the table for the next legislative session, some leading voices, including Portland’s Mayor-elect Keith Wilson, caution against changes that could further criminalize homelessness. Wilson, who campaigned on a platform of addressing unsheltered homelessness, expressed a preference for maximizing the current law rather than reshaping it.
As the debate unfolds, it remains crucial for stakeholders at all levels to consider measures that prioritize both the safety and dignity of homeless populations and the general welfare of communities. The effectiveness of Oregon’s approach could serve as a model for other regions grappling with similar challenges.
It’s important to note that this article was composed by automation and may contain inaccuracies. Anyone seeking corrections or removal of content can reach out via email to [email protected].