The city of Vancouver isn’t yet ready to repeal its Human Services Facilities ordinance, but the discussion about its possible replacement continues. The council received an update on the matter during a Monday evening workshop.
The ordinance was adopted in 1991 and regulates where services including shelters and food pantries can be located. A recent ruling by the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected that approach and raised concerns about possible legal action against the city because of the ordinance. Chief Assistant City Attorney Jonathan Young said the city’s two areas of primary concern for such legal action are discrimination against physical abilities and familial status as outlined in the Fair Housing Act.
Vancouver has spent nearly 18 months considering the issue. In July, an idea to repeal the ordinance was presented. The planning commission has been working on a new framework for regulating the placement of facilities, but it does not yet have a complete proposal.
Recommendations at this point include eliminating minimum spacing requirements that keep facilities from locating near each other and allowing human service facilities to locate wherever similar uses are allowed. For example, a food bank could locate in similar areas that allow a warehouse because the two facility types are most closely related under city code, said Chad Eiken, the city’s community and economic development director.
While the city is concerned about legal action and potential discrimination as the code is written, there’s another problem with the ordinance: due to the current ordinance’s limitations, the city is running out of space to locate additional services.
“The ordinance has worked to some extent in pushing these facilities further east, but pretty soon there won’t be any place to locate these facilities,” Eiken said.
At this point, he said, the main concern is for multifamily zones where facilities are only allowed with a conditional use permit. The new framework would allow facilities in such areas outright.
Mayor Tim Leavitt said it’s intolerable that the city has a code that could violate the rights of its residents.
“Some in our community have gone into a herd mentality — protect our neighborhoods, not in our backyards. Our (job) as councilors is to free ourselves of our emotions and make decisions in the best interests of everybody,” Leavitt said.
Councilor Jack Burkman said he’s not surprised the ordinance is coming to council now for review given how much the city has changed in the last 26 years.
“I’m not quite sure how this is going to get resolved,” Burkman said. “My concern is that with the best of intentions, the planning commission addressing this might limit our opportunities for employment and jobs.”
Councilor Alishia Topper pointed out that while some are concerned with the negative impacts of facilities locating in their neighborhoods, the majority of services are provided by the nonprofit sector.
“I think that concern for having poor people served in your neighborhood should be alleviated by the level of professionalism from those services,” Topper said. Look to the food banks as example, she said. “I am not afraid to have a food bank in my backyard.”
The same could be said of shelters, she added, which many families might not even know are located nearby.
“I’m very sensitive to not discriminate against people just because of the size of their paycheck and making sure there’s equity across the city to provide services where services are needed,” she said.
To residents who say poor people will bring more area crime, Topper said, “That certainly is not true.”
The planning commission is scheduled to discuss the ordinance again on Dec. 12. Another council workshop could happen as early as February. Once the council votes on the ordinance, changes would go into effect within 30 days.
