Grants Pass approves settlement with Disabilities Rights Oregon; injunction to be lifted after court filings

The Grants Pass City Council on Aug. 8 approved a settlement and mutual release agreement intended to resolve the case Disability Rights Oregon v. City of Grants Pass, Josephine County Circuit Court case number 25CV05989. City attorneys said the agreement will allow the parties to file dismissal documents and seek lifting of the court’s injunction that had limited enforcement of certain park regulations.

City counsel described the agreement's principal terms: the city would ensure capacity for up to 150 individuals within the urban growth boundary with potable water for drinking and washing for a one‑year period (staff said the city can “ensure” capacity by contracting with a nonprofit to provide services); the agreement permits a third party to provide shade and services at resting sites around water and portable toilet areas; the city will develop a reasonable ADA accommodation process; and the city will offer an additional one‑time $60,000 grant to a nonprofit for capital development to support services for the population covered by the agreement. The proposed settlement also includes attorney fees in the amount of $85,000; staff said the city reached agreement with its insurance provider to reimburse a portion of the fees.

Stephanie, the city attorney, told council the settlement requires no admission of liability. She outlined the litigation timeline: the complaint was filed Jan. 30, a temporary restraining order was issued Feb. 3 and a preliminary injunction followed March 28; an earlier agreement in May led to the partial restoration of seven parks. She said the parties finalized the current agreement on the Monday before the meeting and that the plaintiff’s attorney expected to obtain internal signatures and file dismissal documents within about a week, after which the city hoped parks now covered by the injunction would be returned to enforcement and cleaned up.

The settlement drew extended public comment at the meeting from residents and Park Watch volunteers who described safety concerns at Baker Park and other sites. Speakers raised questions about where people would go after sites are cleared and criticized the recurring costs of services and grants the settlement requires. One speaker, Shoney Nelson, described attending a Park Watch demonstration and said a rock struck a person’s mobility aid during a protest; another, Kevin Gambucci, asked what would stop subsequent lawsuits. Several speakers urged stronger enforcement and more police resources.

Council members and staff pressed staff on details and the settlement’s limits. Staff emphasized the city’s obligation is to “ensure” capacity for 150 individuals (the city said it need not directly run the services if a third party provides them under a grant or contract). City staff and outside counsel explained that an earlier court ruling interpreting Oregon House Bill 3115 established a local baseline that, in this court’s view, is an objectively defensible level of capacity and accommodations for Grants Pass: roughly 150 resting opportunities with ADA access, water and sanitation. Staff said the agreement is intended to reduce litigation risk by addressing the court’s concerns while restoring the city’s ability to enforce park rules.

Councilor Rick moved to adopt the resolution approving the settlement and mutual release agreement; Seth seconded. The council approved the settlement on a unanimous roll‑call vote.