A change to Vancouver’s Human Service Facilities ordinance will benefit nonprofit organizations that provide social services and, in turn, residents who receive those services. But city officials must remain aware of the impact on property owners and neighborhoods.
Last week, the Vancouver City Council unanimously approved an update to a 1991 ordinance that limited where services could be located. As The Columbian reported: “Human service facilities can now locate where like services are allowed. Shelters can locate wherever commercial lodging is permitted, for example, and food and clothing pantries can locate where retail businesses are allowed.”
This change was not made lightly. The city’s Planning Commission began examining the previous ordinance more than two years ago before presenting two options to the city council. The consensus is that the adopted plan is equitable and avoids the risk of illegally discriminating against certain service providers.
Ideally, the new plan will make it easier for nonprofits to bring services to the people who need them. If it improves the ability to deliver targeted and timely services at a lower cost, then the ordinance will be beneficial.
The drawback, however, could be a clustering of services that draws more homeless people to a particular area. Notably, residents near Share House — on West 13th Street, south of Mill Plain Boulevard — have lobbed legitimate complaints in recent years about the area becoming a hub for people who have no place else to go. Tent encampments pop up, are eventually cleared out by law enforcement, and quickly return.
As one local resident explained during a city council meeting: “The big concern here is that when these facilities start to go into these low-income neighborhoods, I am concerned they will further reduce property values.” Lower property values would encourage more facilities to locate in those areas. “This is a negative feedback loop that really concerns me,” he added.
That is a valid concern. While city officials have afforded much needed attention to the homeless crisis throughout the area, those needs should not override the needs of property owners and businesses. Striking the proper balance can be difficult, but it must remain the ultimate goal. The new ordinance does not allow a homeless shelter to set up in a residential neighborhood, but there inevitably is some spillover when services that attract homeless people set up a few blocks away.
Clark County is fortunate to have many nonprofit organizations and leaders who are addressing the homeless epidemic. We encourage them and the city council to continue this important work. But we also express concern that the new ordinance will lead to a congregation of needy people and inordinately impact a particular neighborhood. City officials should closely monitor the impact of the new ordinance and be open to input from residents in affected areas.
Addressing homeless issues and reducing the number of homeless people requires a multi-pronged approach. No single approach can effectively solve such a complex problem, and voter approval of an affordable housing tax levy in 2016 demonstrated the interest of citizens in contributing to solutions.
The new Human Services Facilities ordinance will bear watching to ensure that it is an effective approach to an issue that affects all of us.
