Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Camping Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Salem City Council adopts amended camping ordinance after debate over undefined “behavior”
Summary
The Salem City Council gave final approval May 8 to an amended ordinance updating Chapter 24, Section 31 (camping). Councilors added language specifying that behavioral grounds for denying shelter admission be defined by the shelter; the measure passed on second reading after public testimony from unhoused advocates and residents urging caution.
The Salem City Council on May 8 approved on second and final passage an amendment to Chapter 24, Section 31, the city—s camping ordinance, after councilors added language clarifying how "behavior" that can bar admission to an otherwise available shelter is to be defined.
The change came after several members of the public urged the council not to broaden enforcement powers without ensuring shelter availability and clear definitions. "You have tried to pass the buck to others in state and federal government as if that also magically absolves us of responsibility," public commenter Ryan Valentine said during the meeting.
The council adopted an amendment to Amendment A that inserts language making clear that an "individual's behavior preventing admission ... shall be considered only as defined by the shelter." Councilor Cohen moved for adoption of the ordinance on second passage; Councilor Morcillo offered the language clarification and Councilor Watson Feld seconded the amendment. The amendment passed and the ordinance was then approved as amended. The council clerk said the amended ordinance will be re-advertised before it becomes effective.
Why it matters: the ordinance governs when city rules can be used to prohibit camping and under what circumstances enforcement is linked to the availability of shelter. Several public speakers, including Caitlin Tracomi and Kelly Jay, said current wording could let law enforcement displace people without a reliable, clearly defined offer of shelter. "Increasing the powers of the police to displace people with no offer of shelter or available list of shelters will push people further away from resources and their community," Caitlin Tracomi said.
Council discussion focused narrowly on the single point of definition. Councilor Davis raised the motion to add wording tying the availability question to shelter determinations to ensure the change would not be interpreted in a way that allowed enforcement when shelters were effectively unavailable. Councilor Merkel asked for procedural clarity about second passage after amendment; the city clerk confirmed the ordinance can be adopted as amended but must be advertised again before final enactment.
What the council decided: the council approved the ordinance on second reading as amended. The transcript records the council—s action as "matter carries"; no numerical roll-call tally for the final vote is recorded in the meeting transcript.
What remains unsettled: public speakers asked for broader policy alternatives, including expanding zoning for single-room-occupancy units and increasing shelter capacity and services. Several commenters urged the council to consult directly with people experiencing homelessness when drafting enforcement or housing policy. The council did not adopt any immediate new funding or shelter-expansion directives as part of the vote; the change adopted was limited to clarifying the ordinance language.
The council—s action will be re-advertised per the clerk—s instruction; further procedural steps were not detailed in the transcript.
