Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tumwater council expands park rules to all city property, adds exclusion/appeal process
Summary
Council approved Ordinance O2025‑008 to apply existing park prohibitions to all city properties, added procedural appeal rights to the hearing examiner and preserved enforcement discretion; staff said exclusions are administrative (first offense up to 7 days; repeat up to 90 days) and not criminal records.
Tumwater’s City Council voted to adopt Ordinance O2025‑008, amending Municipal Code section 12.32 to extend the city’s existing park rules to all city properties, including city hall, the library and public safety facilities.
Parks Director Chuck explained that the change largely extends 27 existing park prohibitions to any city property and adds a pre‑deprivation procedural appeal to the hearing examiner for exclusionary letters. "The ability for the parks director to issue an exclusionary letter under the current code ... is anywhere from 1 day to, I believe, a year," the city attorney explained during questions; the ordinance standardizes exclusion language and clarifies appeal procedures.
What changed and why: staff said the city already had enforcement tools for parks but lacked consistent rules for non‑park city property; the amendment aligns expectations across properties and gives enforcement officers another graduated step short of civil infraction. City counsel and staff emphasized the ordinance shifts some responses from criminal misdemeanor enforcement to civil infraction processes and formalizes appeal rights.
Council concerns and clarifications: during extended Q&A council members raised whether exclusions could be applied to someone attending city business, how long exclusions last, and whether exclusion letters would become part of a public record. The city attorney said exclusions would not create a criminal record and that hearing examiner review requires proof by a preponderance of the evidence; staff said typical first‑time exclusions would not exceed seven days and repeat exclusions within one year could extend up to 90 days.
Homelessness and enforcement discretion: staff emphasized that the ordinance does not change the city’s approach to people in crisis or the availability of outreach; the police and newly formed mobile outreach/crisis response team were described as resources to offer assistance before enforcement. Council members requested continued public communication about what the ordinance does and does not do.
Outcome: Council approved the ordinance after discussion; staff will prepare templates and guidance for exclusion letters and return as needed for implementation details.
