Council holds first hearing on updated urban-camping ordinance after U.S. Supreme Court decision; Prop 312 cited

Town Attorney Christina presented draft updates to Payson's urban-camping ordinance at the Jan. 22 council meeting, telling councilors the changes respond to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that reversed Ninth Circuit precedent on anti-camping enforcement.

"In 2018, Martin v. Boise's Ninth Circuit decision constrained enforcement of anti-camping ordinances when shelter beds were unavailable," Christina told the council. "Last year the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit's Martin decision, which reinstates local authority to prohibit sleeping or camping in public places in certain circumstances." She said the revised ordinance would make the town's code consistent with that decision and provide the police department with clearer enforcement tools.

Key provisions in the draft ordinance and accompanying prosecutorial guidance include: - A prohibition on sleeping or camping on public streets, rights of way and parks outside permitted events. - Authority for temporary park exclusions (a 30-day ban) after an individual has received two citations for camping in town-controlled parks; the ban is structured as a short-term measure rather than an indefinite bar. - A criminal penalty for violating the updated camping provisions, with documented mitigating factors (for example, a person's willingness to accept services or quick compliance) to guide charging decisions.

Christina said the town must also consider other constitutional protections during enforcement, including First Amendment free-speech rights in public spaces and potential Fourth Amendment issues when dealing with personal property. She said the town attorney's office would prepare a homelessness policy and prosecutorial guidelines to accompany any ordinance change.

The attorney also cited Proposition 312, a state ballot measure that passed in November 2024. She said Prop 312 allows certain property-tax payers to seek refunds if they can show a town's failure to enforce nuisance ordinances caused specific harm to their property; the town has 30 days to respond to such claims once forwarded by the Department of Revenue. "Prop 312 is a principal reason we need to shore up code now," she said.

Speakers during public comment urged caution and services. Pat Lockwood, a resident, told councilors Payson lacks beds and supportive services and urged a coordinated response: "You can't arrest away homeless," she said. Councilors asked staff to return with more detailed enforcement guidelines and options for coordinated social services and outreach.

This was the first public hearing on the draft ordinance; no final action was taken. Staff said training for police and final prosecutorial guidance would follow any ordinance revision.