An ordinance that would temporarily exclude people who are charged with committing certain offenses from parts of Astoria is on hold until next week.
After listening to nearly two hours of testimony at a public hearing Monday night, the Astoria City Council opted to continue the meeting to next Monday. They said they wanted more time for a robust council discussion.
City Councilor Vance Lump has already announced he plans to vote against the ordinance. But, he said he wants to be a part of the discussion.
City Councilors Andrea Mazzarella, Andy Davis and Elisabeth Adams have expressed discomfort with the ordinance and the potential for it to single out one group of Astorians in particular: those without housing.
Mayor Sean Fitzpatrick, however, has expressed support for the ordinance, saying the intent is to curb problematic behaviors.
The proposed ordinance would establish “enhanced enforcement zones” in downtown Astoria as well as in the city’s Uppertown and Uniontown neighborhoods. A number of offenses could get someone excluded from these areas, some more serious than others.
The ordinance establishes three tiers with tier 1 including things like rape, public indecency, arson, theft and discharging weapons.
At the lower end, tier 3 offenses include consuming alcohol in public, illegal camping, marijuana-related offenses and graffiti. Someone would need to rack up three or more violations in this category before they would face the possibility of exclusion.
Exclusion would last for 90 days. People who are excluded could still enter the areas for appointments, to access social services or go to work or to attend religious services or public meetings.
Astoria’s Municipal Court judges would need to approve the order before police could exclude someone and enforce that exclusion.
The ordinance currently includes a sunset clause and would expire after two years, a measure suggested by Mazzarella as a way to provide a chance to evaluate the impacts of the ordinance.
Astoria Police Chief Stacy Kelly has said police intend to apply the ordinance sparingly and will look at other ways to gain compliance first. He has referred to the ordinance as a tool to get at bad behavior by setting up serious consequences.
He also emphasized that the ordinance is not meant to target unhoused people.
Public testimony on either side of the issue, however, referenced homelessness almost exclusively.
Proponents of the ordinance say establishing enhanced enforcement zones will give police a way to curb growing quality-of-life issues downtown tied to Astoria’s homeless population.
“Astoria businesses are deeply frustrated and some are on the verge of giving up,” said David Reid, executive director of the Astoria-Warrenton Area Chamber of Commerce. Business owners said they regularly have to clean up messes and human waste outside of their businesses.
Among those in support of the ordinance were former state senator Betsy Johnson and state Rep. Cyrus Javadi, who represents District 32 which includes Clatsop County. John Lansing, speaking as a representative for the lawmaker, called the ordinance historic for Astoria.
“We continue to applaud the initiative that your staff is taking,” Lansing said.
On Monday, a number of people representing the Astoria Senior Center also described unsafe interactions with homeless campers who have been camping on sidewalks across from the Astoria Public Library to the west of the center and on sidewalks to the east of the center near a former Lutheran church.
The campers regularly move between the city blocks and have been a source of frustration and worry in recent weeks for both the senior center and organizers of the Astoria Sunday Market.
Missy Johnson, vice president at the senior center, said she has witnessed violent arguments and unsafe situations.
“I don’t know what the answer is,” she said.
Senior Center Executive Director Dean Deonier urged the City Council to give police officers more tools to deal with unhoused people who are acting in illegal or dangerous ways.
Several people on both sides of the issue emphasized the need for clarity in the ordinance.
Larry Allen said he was in favor of the ordinance — “or an ordinance that can address bad behavior, illegal behavior and dangerous behavior. I’m not vilifying homeless people. I’m vilifying bad behavior.”
But, he added, “whatever we do with this ordinance, I would hope that it will not be ambiguous for our police department. No officer should go out on a call and be unclear as to what the law is.”
Critics fear the ordinance paves the way for abuse and the targeting of the homeless population. They argued the ordinance will not solve the problems it aims to fix.
Anita Lambert, a registered nurse who volunteers at the senior center, shared Johnson and Deonier’s concerns about senior safety, but said a big issue is the lack of access to mental health services.
“You are dealing with a multifaceted problem,” she said, but added that “throwing it all onto the shoulders of the police…that does not work.”
Homeless advocates called for the City Council to instead spend city resources and time on supporting and developing places where people can go: housing, shelters and daytime drop-in centers.
One woman, who had previously been homeless and had struggled with mental health and addiction issues, urged the City Council to reject the ordinance. She said this kind of ordinance would create only anger and derision.
Astoria resident Sue Skinner agreed.
“I think it’s a really bad idea,” she said. “I think it’s just going to expand the problem and create a lot of animosity in the community.”