With the City Council moving to “pass the buck” earlier this month by signing off on a letter with recommendations for Mayor Murray’s proposed transitional homeless encampments and not moving toward a resolution, many Ballardites are frustrated with the actions of their city officials and feel they have missed an opportunity to have a say about the encampment location.

Back in March the council approved legislation to use public city land as transitional homeless encampments. The Mayors Office was charged with coming up with seven locations. Earlier this month the locations were announced and one is located in Ballard at 2826 NW Market Street.

The law did not require the Office of the Mayor to seek a resolution for the locations from the City Council. But the Office did seek a resolution, and the Council responded by “signing off” on the locations through a letter rather than moving toward a resolution.

For many Ballardites, a major contention lies in the letter. Some believe the council stymied their chance for public engagement in making the location decision, especially because if the council had moved to a resolution the Land Use Committee would have likely taken it on and the process would include meetings for public comment.

Much of the consternation stems from this portion of the letter:

“The opportunity for community engagement should not be utilized by neighbors and businesses as a platform to exclude transitional encampments from any of our neighborhoods. The Council will not lend a sympathetic ear to these efforts. Instead, this engagement should be utilized as an opportunity to build strong community-based partnerships to ensure the successful co-existence of transitional encampments and other residential and commercial uses in these neighborhoods,” wrote the City Council.

Some interpret as the council not supporting public process,but District 6 Councilmen, Mike O’Brien, said, “That was not the intent at all.”

“I can see how folks will take it that way. … I know some people interpret the letter as saying not to have a public meetings and that’s not what it was intended to do.”

O’Brien explained that the Council’s move to not make a resolution was done so to put the process back into the Mayor’s Office hands since they had done the vetting for encampment locations and are in the best position to engage the public, which he said they should have been done in the first place.

“For us (City Council) you have an obligation to go out and talk to the community, you can’t just hand this off to the council and call that public process.”

The sentiment is further explained in the Council letter:

“We expect that your Office's and/or Departments' engagement include, at a minimum, outreach to any Community Council, District Council and neighborhood Chambers of Commerce in each of the proposed neighborhoods, as well as providing a clear place that the public can go to have their questions answered. This may be a combination of online information, a clear community contact and/or information accessible at neighborhood service centers or libraries,” wrote City Council.

Indeed, O’Brien said he has had private meetings with the mayor and assures that the Office of the Mayor is planning public meetings to discuss encampment plans and the process for selection in the next coming weeks.

“I think that the best way to move forward is for the residents of District 6 and particularly the people and business owners near the site to have direct conversations with the people making the decisions and doing that work.”

O’Brien explained that the meetings would be a time for the public to engage in the discussion; however, something the council does not want are the meetings to be a forum where citizens rally in order to find a different site location. O’Brien explained that that was what the “contentious” portion of the letter addressed and has been misunderstood.

“The mayor went through a process that determined the sites as the best in the city, and they have their reasons for why they are the best ones, but we need to see that before moving forward. … What we are not trying to do is see a turn out for support to move the site to another neighborhood. … We want safe housing solutions while working on long term fixes for homelessness.”

However, O’Brien said that another location is not off the table. Meanwhile, the Ballard Chamber of Commerce has asked that a site might be considered on a private lot.

“We needed to locate a site. We found one. I’m not saying it’s impossible for a different site. It’s not a done deal, but we do not want to set up a public process where people can move the site to another location. … That’s not the most productive process.”

Also, O’Brien explained that a council resolution is not off the table just yet.

“The resolution we have is sitting in a drawer, and we may or may act on it, but we made it clear to the mayor he needs to engage the public and go though the public process before it can move forward.”

As far as the Council’s role in the public discussion, O’Brien explained that it would oversee the Office Mayor and city departments and make sure they follow the laws the way they are intended.

As for O’Brien, he said he would be active in the public meeting process and would act as the face of the city in the meetings if the mayor himself or his senior staff members are not present. He said he would rely heavily on city department staff for answers to more technical questions, such as the vetting process for encampment locations.