Dispute over Puyallup’s zoning for homeless centers won’t die, now headed to court
A Puyallup nonprofit continues to fight the city over where homeless centers can be built.
The zoning law has been brought before a state hearings board and stalled in the courts system for more than a year.
Homeward Bound, parent company of Puyallup’s homeless resource center New Hope, filed an appeal to the Pierce County Superior Court on Jan. 17, after the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board sided with the city last month.
The Puyallup City Council revised its homeless center zoning rules to meet the board’s request. There are now 191 parcels where a homeless facility could apply to locate, but Homeward Bound says in its appeal the revisions are not enough.
The appeal petition disagrees with the board’s decision that the city has met its own code to provide housing for all.
Homeward Bound board member Ric Rose said providing homeless shelters is necessary work, but Puyallup has made the process onerous.
“You have to ask yourself who is willing to come into this environment,” Rose said. “Not only are they not supporting and encouraging, they have been actively making it more difficult.”
City attorney Joe Beck said he believes the council stretched beyond its comfort zone to approve more expansive zoning rules for homeless centers.
“The City Council has done their best to comply with the Growth Management Hearings Board critique and direction,” Beck said. “They have sufficiently complied and done what they need to do to make this defensible.”
Legal clash continues
The feud began when Puyallup passed a law in September 2018 that restricted homeless centers to 41 parcels in the northwest corner of the city, where many manufacturing and distribution centers are located.
Homeward Bound challenged that law. It was examined by a growth management board, which agreed with Homeward Bound that the law broke city code to “promote a variety of housing for people with special needs, such as the elderly, disabled, homeless and single householders.”
The growth management board also instructed Puyallup in June to revise the law with specific concerns. Zoning for homeless shelters and centers has to be more easily accessible by pedestrians and public transit, and it has to be more expansive, the board ruled.
In September 2019, the City Council approved more areas of the city where homeless facilities can exist. The revision created “buffers” around hospitals, schools and residential areas, and added 219 acres to the initial 198 acres allowed for homeless centers upon permitting. The City Council still holds the power to overrule any of the zoned areas for homeless facilities and them property rights anywhere in the city.
The growth management board did not support Homeward Bound’s argument that homeless centers should be considered “essential public facilities,” which are protected by the state. Essential public facilities tend to be difficult to site and include correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, substance abuse clinics and group homes.
Homeward Bound appealed that part of the board’s decision to Superior Court.
A nonprofit firm, Northwest Justice Project, filed a second appeal on behalf of Homeward Bound. It claims the zoning means New Hope’s current location is illegal. It would be difficult for New Hope to relocate, the petition to appeal said.
“Who wants to go in and face this opposition?” Rose said. “We need a process that’s going to promote supporting public services, and our view is that the current ordinance doesn’t do this.”
Puyallup will continue to pay for outside counsel, the Eglick & Whited law firm, to handle the case. Beck said the city doesn’t have a choice in going to court when the city is sued. The Herald has previously reported that Puyallup has spent more defending homelessness laws than on service providers. From January 2014 to June 2019, the city paid Eglick & Whited more than $62,000.
“It is unfortunate from a legal standpoint we spend most of our time defending ourselves,” he said. “We’re doing our best to resolve and avoid litigation where we can.”
This story was originally published January 27, 2020 at 5:25 AM.
