The City of Aberdeen plans to clear the large, longtime homeless encampment along the Chehalis River as early as next week, Mayor Erik Larson says, now that a federal judge has denied a temporary restraining order that sought to halt the city’s plans.

Larson said today that a 72-hour notice to vacate will be delivered to the inhabitants Monday, and that anyone who doesn’t leave before Thursday, July 11 would be forcibly removed.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton in Tacoma rejected the delay sought by plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit who have argued that clearing the camp is unconstitutional if the city doesn’t provide other spaces where the homeless people can reside.

“It is true that some plaintiffs stand to lose the place they call home,” wrote Leighton in his order. “However, the city has persuasively shown that River Camp poses dangers for those who live there and for the city’s police and first responders.”

So far there’s no designated site where the city intends to direct the displaced homeless people. Following the city’s recent negotiations with the plaintiffs that failed to find a mutually-agreed solution, the city provided a reinterpretation of its ordinances, according to Leighton’s order, to identify some sections of city sidewalks in and around downtown where the homeless are allowed to camp.

The city told the courts that homeless camping is allowed on unreserved public sidewalks as long as there remains a 4-foot public access route as required federally by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make its case, the city submitted a map with areas highlighted to identify downtown sidewalks wider than 4 feet where public camping can be allowed.

Larson said a newly-formed committee of city officials is working to identify another location for the homeless residents to move to, but the city can now legally clear the property even if the city doesn’t find one.

The lawsuit concerns a narrow property between the river and train tracks near downtown in what’s often referred to as “River City,” where homeless people have lived for decades in tents, makeshift shacks and vehicles.

The plaintiffs, consisting of eight homeless people and two advocates, argued that clearing the camp is unconstitutional if the city doesn’t provide other spaces where the homeless people can reside. The lawsuit also argues that other city ordinances that restrict public camping and prohibit people from sitting or lying down on sidewalks downtown are unconstitutional.

Christina Gilchrist, 25, currently lives at the riverfront in a shack, and said she’s been living at the property since she was 15. When asked what she’ll do if forced to leave, she wasn’t sure.

“I honestly don’t know what I’ll do, I have nowhere else to go,” said Gilchrist. “I certainly won’t pitch a tent in front of someone’s business, because I like my privacy. I don’t like all my business being out on front street.”

Larson and the council agreed in May to clear the encampment, citing safety, public health and welfare concerns, but it got delayed by the lawsuit. These issues include difficulty for police and fire officials to respond quickly to incidents, concerns that people damage the train tracks by crossing them, and poor living conditions at the encampment, among others.

“The big thing is just the constant issues we’re having with public safety and welfare with the River Street property and trying to address them as quickly as possible because they continue to grow and be problematic with impacts to the railroad and everything,” said Larson in a phone interview.

The plan to clear the encampment comes as a blow to the plaintiffs, with some concerned the city will go through with clearing the camp without providing a designated space to move people. The Rev. Sarah Monroe, an Episcopal priest who filed the initial lawsuit and runs the Chaplains on the Harbor shelter in Westport, said she wishes the city instead prioritized other ideas like identifying a low barrier shelter or transitional housing.

“I am frustrated that the city thinks that pushing people into camping downtown is some sort of solution,” Monroe said. “To push more people into the elements and into the downtown area, without access to sanitation, would be harmful both to the city and city businesses and to homeless people. It has been brought up frequently that the river camp is unsafe and unsanitary, which is absolutely true, but this alternative helps no one.”

Last Wednesday, Larson formed a committee consisting of himself, the city department heads, and several Aberdeen City Council members to discuss potential alternative locations where the homeless inhabitants could move to, along with other plans to reduce possible negative effects when the site is cleared. Dee Anne Shaw, a council member who’s on the committee, said she and other city officials are working through the weekend to ensure the riverfront homeless people aren’t simply cleared off with nowhere to go.

“My personal view is we need to do everything in our power to be ready so we don’t have people pitching tents in the right-of-ways, we do not want that,” said Shaw. “I’m disappointed that we’re not further along and are now kind of in an emergency situation. But at the end of the day I think we’ll be able to get it done.”

She added that it’s important to get people off the property so the police can more easily separate the vulnerable homeless population from those who reside on the property but are criminals and prey on them.

Larson said the council agenda will likely be posted Monday that shows what proposals will be considered to mitigate effects of clearing the camps, before the council considers taking action at the next meeting Wednesday, which is the night before people would be forced off the property. He noted that the city still plans to take steps in the future to address the city’s homelessness issue and provide alternative shelter.

The council was not made aware of the decision by Larson to clear the camps before announcing it publicly Wednesday, but Council President Tawni Andrews said she doesn’t mind and is glad the process is moving quickly.

“I believe (the encampment) has gone on too long and we need to take care of it,” said Andrews.

During a court hearing May 7, Leighton asked city officials and the plaintiffs to come up with a mutually agreed-upon place for the encampment residents to go. The negotiations, however, did not result in a solution that was acceptable to the plaintiffs, causing them to renew their motion for a temporary restraining order to delay the evictions, Leighton wrote in his order.

By presenting the public sidewalks available to camping, and stating he doubts that clearing the site is unconstitutional, Leighton ruled the city can lawfully go forward with its plan. But he also temporarily barred the city from enforcing a few of its other ordinances: the primary anti-camping ordinance, another ordinance concerning obstructing sidewalks and the relatively new law that says people cannot sit or lie down on sidewalks in Aberdeen’s downtown business improvement area.

A hearing Sept. 4 in federal court has been scheduled to assess the constitutionality of the three ordinances, and Larson said those ordinances will not be enforced by the city before the hearing.

This map was submitted to the courts by the city. It shows in yellow where the city has identified sidewalks where the homeless will be allowed to camp in public. The pink lines represent the zone for the no sit/lie ordinance zone, which will be not enforced temporarily due to the judge’s order.

This map was submitted to the courts by the City of Aberdeen. Sidewalks are highlighted in yellow where public camping is allowed. The pink lines represent the zone for the no sit/lie ordinance zone, which will be not enforced temporarily due to the federal judge’s order.