The Kelso City Council voted Tuesday to direct the city’s contract lobbyist to oppose House Bill 2489, proposed state legislation that would restrict when cities can ticket, arrest, or otherwise penalize people for “life-sustaining activities” like sleeping or resting in public if adequate shelter is not available.

Councilmembers framed the request as a “local control” issue, arguing Olympia should not set statewide limits on how cities handle public camping and vehicle habitation. The vote followed a short discussion sparked by a late agenda change requested by Deputy Mayor Lisa Alexander.

HB 2489 is in the early stages of the 2025–26 legislative session and would need to pass the Washington House and Senate and be signed by Gov. Bob Ferguson before it could take effect. The bill’s text would bar cities and towns from adopting or enforcing laws that “criminalize, penalize, or otherwise prohibit” people experiencing homelessness from engaging in “life-sustaining activities” on public property unless the city can demonstrate “adequate alternative shelter space” was available at the time and place of the conduct.

The definition of “adequate alternative shelter space” in the bill is detailed and would require, among other things, shelter to be accessible, free, and able to accommodate disabilities as well as pets, partners, family members, support persons, and belongings. The bill also requires that the shelter be located within the city limits of the city attempting to enforce the restriction.

Kelso’s discussion comes as cities across Washington have moved to tighten camping and “vehicle residency” restrictions after a 2024 U.S. Supreme Court decision in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which held that enforcing generally applicable bans on camping in public does not, by itself, violate the Constitution’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment.” That decision overturned the practical effect of prior Ninth Circuit precedent that had limited enforcement in much of the West when no shelter was available.

In Kelso, the municipal code already contains sweeping restrictions on camping on public property and sets misdemeanor penalties for violations. Under Kelso Municipal Code 9.68, camping and storage of personal property is prohibited in parks and other publicly owned or maintained areas, and it is unlawful during the day (6:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m.) for people to camp or store personal property in city streets. The code also bans occupying a vehicle for the purpose of camping during those same daytime hours when parked in parks, streets, and other public city property.

At the council meeting, Councilmember Jim Hill argued against the state “coming down here and making these changes,” and said Kelso should communicate that it wants the state to “leave us alone,” according to accounts of the discussion. Councilmember Brian Wood made the motion directing the lobbyist to oppose the bill “in principle,” emphasizing the city’s desire to preserve “flexibility and rights” that have expanded after recent court decisions. The motion passed unanimously.

The only dispute on the dais was procedural: whether to add the item at the last minute. Councilmember Mike Karnofski raised concerns that late additions reduce the public’s ability to prepare for council action. Hill also noted the bill is early in the legislative process and suggested the council had time to consider it at a later meeting, even as he opposed the bill itself.

Why this matters locally

For Kelso residents, HB 2489 could directly affect whether and how the city can enforce existing camping and vehicle-habitation rules—especially if local shelter capacity is limited or comes with restrictions that make it inaccessible to many unhoused people (such as rules around pets, partners, disability accommodations, or curfews).

Supporters of HB 2489 argue it would curb what they see as ineffective and harmful “criminalization” of homelessness by stopping cities from cycling people through citations, jail, and displacement without providing a realistic place to go. Opponents argue it would constrain local governments’ ability to address public health and safety concerns in parks, sidewalks, and other public spaces.

Kelso’s decision to engage its lobbyist signals the city wants to weigh in early on a bill that could reshape the balance between municipal enforcement power and statewide standards for how public space can be regulated when people are surviving outdoors.

Sources