Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Independence to avoid Polk Street Park for overnight camping, present petition with 200+ signatures
Summary
Residents and neighborhood representatives told the Independence City Council they oppose locating overnight camping in Polk Street Park, presenting a petition they say has more than 200 signatures and urging the city to identify monitored, nonresidential sites instead.
Antonia Reyna told the council the neighborhood had gathered "over 200 signatures" opposing overnight camping in Polk Street Park and urged the city to follow examples from other Oregon cities that designated monitored, nonresidential camping spaces. "Over a 100 of those were just from the community near Polk Park," Reyna said, and she described canvassing that produced neighborhood concern about safety and residential impacts.
Multiple residents echoed Reyna’s concerns about notification and safety. A resident who identified himself as Walter Nelson said he moved to Independence "to escape the homeless crisis" in Salem and warned that expanding shelter capacity could bring crime and drug use: "If you put in a 100 beds, you're gonna have 500 of them with tents... You're gonna be overrun with heroin," he said, calling instead for investments in mental-health and drug-prevention services.
Other speakers said they had learned of the proposals through social media rather than formal city notice and urged the council to improve outreach. One attendee referenced state laws and recent court action, saying House Bill 3115—passed early in the COVID era—and the Grants Pass case were part of the legal backdrop shaping what the city can and cannot require of people seeking shelter.
Several neighbors requested that any designated camping be located outside residential areas and proposed models used by Wilsonville, Ashland and Medford, where officials adopted site-specific rules and monitored spaces outside neighborhoods. One councilor suggested staff research options such as designating parking spaces behind municipal buildings, noting existing surveillance and picnic amenities in municipal parking areas.
The public-comment period closed after the council noted a list of residents who were present but did not wish to speak. Council members responded by thanking the speakers and saying staff and council would continue to evaluate options, engage neighbors and explore solutions that balance public safety, compassion and legal constraints.
The council did not take a formal vote on a camping site during the meeting; further study and community engagement were discussed as next steps.
