In a victory for local housing and homeless advocates this morning, the Washington State Supreme Court overturned Proposition 1, the ballot initiative that banned camping in most of Spokane by making it illegal to camp within 1,000 feet of schools, parks and day care centers.
The proposition was spearheaded by local attorney Brian Hansen, bankrolled by Larry Stone and passed by about 75% of Spokane voters in 2023. But the law wasn’t enforced immediately, due to concerns among city administrators that it could be considered cruel and unusual punishment under the federal court ruling Martin v. Boise — which prohibited cities from enforcing anti-camping laws against unhoused people unless there were shelter beds available to house the people who would be impacted by the law.
The city began enforcing Prop 1 after the United States Supreme court overturned Martin v. Boise in 2024, leading to a massive increase in citations for crimes intrinsically linked to homelessness, such as pedestrian interference and unlawful camping.
In August 2023, before the initiative could even appear on voters’ ballots, local homelessness service providers Julie Garcia of Jewels Helping Hands and Ben Stuckart of the Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium filed a joint lawsuit against Hansen, who wrote Prop 1, asking for it to be removed from the ballot. That request was denied by a state superior court judge. The appellate courts also sided with Hansen.
In the summer of 2024, the Washington State Supreme Court agreed to take up Garcia and Stuckart’s case — to evaluate whether it was legal to put the measure as written before voters. It’s been nearly a year since then, and Garcia said she had become “nervous that it just was gonna go to the wayside.”
But this morning, the court issued its ruling, declaring that the initiative should have never been on the ballot at all, because it “exceeds the proper scope of the local initiative power.” Functionally, this means that Proposition 1 is overturned and no longer enforceable.
Mayor Lisa Brown’s office did not immediately respond to a request but just minutes after our story went live she sent release stating that “the Washington State Supreme Court’s decision regarding Proposition 1 offers important clarity on the legal boundaries of local initiative powers and reinforces the distinction between legislative and administrative actions.”
“The City’s unlawful camping ordinance, which pre-dated Proposition 1, remains in effect and is being enforced as demonstrated by Spokane Police Department data. We know that enforcement alone is not going to solve homelessness,” Brown wrote. “Our legal team is currently reviewing the Court’s opinion in detail, and we will be working together to thoughtfully chart a path forward that reflects the Court’s guidance, as well as the best interests of our community.”
Brian Hansen told RANGE that “this is not the outcome I was hoping the measure would receive from the state’s highest court.”
“The true judicial branches of this state — that being all the courts below the state Supreme Court, they did their job,” Hansen said. “The state Supreme Court, unfortunately, is a political beast, and I’m saddened to say that because I am a product of this state’s law schools and I took pride in the fact.”
The court’s decision rested primarily on its finding that the ballot measure was more administrative than legislative in nature. Hansen isn’t sure if he plans to push the legislative issue further.
“That might be an exercise in futility, a kabuki dance, if you will, to take that route,” Hansen said this morning. “ I think the more effective route is to implore our city council to listen to the will of 75% of its constituents and pass a city ordinance that codifies the purpose and intent of this legislation or this proposition.”
Reached by phone this morning, Garcia and Stuckart were elated — “Still in shock,” Garcia said.
“ This means that the court still matters, law still matters and that we can help change things for the better,” Garcia said. “ It’s just a start on what needs to be done for the criminalization of homelessness, but it’s a good step in that direction.
Stuckart, a former city council member, said this was “a great win for the rule of law,” and for local government.
“Our argument was that local bodies had already made a decision on camping and where it should be banned. It was a compromise decision between everybody in local government and this initiative tried to subvert that,” Stuckart said. “ I just think we need to let legislators and our local government come to collaborative decisions on where things like camping should be banned.”
“Just because you personally aren’t happy doesn’t mean you should go out and spend hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars running an initiative,” Stuckart added, obliquely referring to Hansen, Stone and other funders.
Garcia sees this legal win as a victory for the unhoused people she serves through street outreach and the scatter site shelters she manages.
“It is not necessarily that I disagree that people should not sleep next to schools or daycares. I agree that nobody, not just people experiencing homelessness, that nobody should exist in those spaces,” Garcia said. “But if we tell people where they can’t go, we have to have somewhere for them to go. Otherwise all we do is take away their right to exist.”
The court ruling can be viewed in full here.
