By Jorge Casuso

August 22, 2024 -- The City Council can remove an exemption in the local anti-camping law that allows the use of sleeping bags, blankets, pillows and bedrolls in public spaces, according to a legal opinion from the City Attorney issued Thursday.

The change is among three options the Council can entertain on Tuesday after a June 28 U.S. Supreme Court ruling paved the way for municipalities to penalize the homeless for camping on public land.

The other two options proposed by City Attorney Doug Sloan include taking no action, which would allow the current exemptions to remain, or directing staff "to continue to monitor what other cities are doing" and return with other recommendations.

If the Council votes to remove the exemptions, the amended ordinance would add "sleeping bags" and "bedrolls" to the definition of "camp facility," making their use illegal.

The Council will take up the issue as State and local governments across the country are staking out positions and taking action, and as local voters prepare to go to the polls in an election expected to focus on public safety.

The Council's 4 to 3 majority -- which includes two Change incumbents, Mayor Phil Brock and Councilmember Oscar de la Torre -- have taken the tough on crime approach that includes cracking down on anti-social behavior.

They note that while Santa Monica already has a strong anti-camping ordinance, neighboring jurisdictions -- including Beverly Hills, Culver City and West Hollywood -- are using the Supreme Court decision to push homeless individuals out.

The Council minority, which is backed by Santa Monica's political establishment, has echoed the concerns expressed by homeless advocates and County Supervisors, who oppose the get-tough approach, saying it criminalizes being homeless.

While making changes to the anti-camping ordinance would likely become a political hot-button issue, Sloan warned that the proposed amendments could have little impact.

"Even if sleeping on public property could be completely outlawed, it will not end," Sloan wrote. "Even if it is legally prohibited, resources must be available and there must be the will to cite or arrest (and) prosecute."

"Even if a case makes it to court and the defendant appears, and a jury were to convict, there certainly are not resources nor the will to hold those convicted of low level crimes such as sleeping in public in the County jail.

"Until there are substantially greater resources available for mental health treatment, substance abuse prevention and treatment, and housing (shelter, transitional, and/or permanent housing), as people necessarily must sleep somewhere, the issue will not be resolved by this Court decision."

The Supreme Court's decision, Sloan wrote, "does not legally require the City to do anything differently, either in legislation or practices.

"There are many legal, resource, and reality considerations," he said. "The decision will not eliminate homelessness, but there are some nuanced changes that could be initiated."

Sloan noted "that the legal process might assist in encouraging people to take advantage of available resources."

But he added that "current laws do not allow people to be forced to accept shelter, and people can decline to accept shelter."