A new proposal in Olympia, called the Shelters, Not Penalties Act, could limit Tacoma’s ability to clear homeless encampments or enforce anti-camping rules unless officials can prove adequate, accessible shelter was available at the time, including for people with disabilities, pets, or personal belongings. City leaders warn that the detailed documentation requirements could complicate basic safety and sanitation efforts, while supporters argue the bill prioritizes shelter over penalties.
What the bill would do
House Bill 2489 would stop cities and counties from enforcing laws that “criminalize, penalize, or otherwise prohibit” life-sustaining activities on public property unless they can show that an adequate alternative shelter space was available at that specific time and place. The proposal defines life-sustaining activities to include moving, resting, sitting, standing, lying down, sleeping, protecting oneself and property, eating, and drinking. It keeps narrow exceptions for behavior that poses an imminent risk or blocks emergency or disability access, according to the House Bill Report.
How it intersects with Tacoma rules
Tacoma toughened its anti-camping code last year through Ordinance No. 29064, which expanded buffer zones around shelters and set up two-block no-camping areas around schools, parks, and libraries. The city’s encampment procedures spell out how the HEAL Team inspects, posts notices, offers services, and ultimately removes unauthorized camps, as reported the City of Tacoma.
City and state reactions
Backers of HB 2489 say it would put an end to what they see as a confusing patchwork of local rules that push people from block to block even when there is nowhere for them to go. Municipal groups counter that the proof requirements could make enforcement nearly impossible, even in situations where public safety or sanitation is clearly at risk, according to WA Cities. State Rep. Mia Gregerson, the bill’s sponsor, told colleagues, “Being homeless is not a crime,” as reported by Axios.
What it would mean on the ground
If HB 2489 becomes law, Tacoma officials would have to show, at the moment of any sweep or citation, that shelter was legally and physically accessible at no cost and could accommodate partners, pets, disabilities, and personal possessions. The bill would also let people who are cited raise a defense that no adequate shelter was actually available and directs courts to dismiss cases when that defense is supported, according to Tacoma Weekly.
Legal and logistical hurdles
The House substitute version keeps, but trims, the exception for imminent risk and allows cities and counties to enter interlocal agreements so they can share shelter capacity. At the same time, it declares that any citation, charge, or prosecution brought in violation of the enforcement standard is invalid, a provision that municipal attorneys say could spur litigation and significantly increase record-keeping demands. The committee report notes that the bill would apply to actions started on or after its effective date and that it would take effect 90 days after the legislative session adjourns, highlighting how the timing and paperwork around enforcement could become crucial, according to the House bill report.
What’s next
HB 2489 has cleared its initial House committee stops and remains under active debate in Olympia. If it passes the full Legislature, Tacoma and other Washington cities will face a new test: proving that shelter space actually existed every time they moved people along, and showing that their outreach and documentation systems can back that up in court. The bill’s sponsorship and current status are available through OpenStates.
