Schilling Calls Urgent Press Conference Today over Homeless Encampments

Emails from the King County Sheriff aren't cutting it... Business owners share their frustrations.

by Katie Kresly.The Mayor of Burien and the King County Sheriff are at an impasse. According to Mayor Kevin Schilling, Sheriff Patti Cole-Tindall has been unwilling to agree to a meeting to discuss options for resolving the Burien law enforcement issues over uncontrolled homeless tent encampments throughout the downtown city sidewalks and greenspaces.

In the past 6 weeks, 3 homeless men have died from drug overdoses. Businesses, residents and city leaders are frustrated with the lack of cooperation from the sheriff.

Today, Mayor Schilling called for an emergency press conference where he gave an update from the Burien standpoint. He asked several business owners to explain their frustrations with lack of law enforcement.

In attendance were Mayor Schilling, Deputy Mayor Mora, Councilmembers Akey and Andrade. Absent were Councilmembers Matta, Garcia and Moore.

The consensus was a call to all local government leaders to sit down together and work out a resolution immediately.Yesterday, Sheriff Cole-Tindall sent a letter of response to the council and to the community - calling Burien's camping ordinance "unconstitutional." She suggested the council amend their ways.The following email conversation between Mayor Kevin Schilling and King County Sheriff Patti Cole-Tindall began after the sheriff sent her public communication to Burien and the council.

FROM: Mayor Kevin Schilling [Wednesday, April 24, 2024 7:10 AM]

Subject: King County Sheriff's Office and the American with Disabilities Act

Hi Sheriff Cole-Tindall,

As you’ve now said in this email, as well as your letter you wrote that you sent to media, you encourage us to “re-adopt its former public camping ordinance while re-engaging with social services contractors.”

Just to quickly address the service contractor issue. REACH was not doing the job it was supposed to. We are currently reallocating those funds. Even Burien Police, including Chief Boe, expressed their dissatisfaction with the work of REACH. Hence the need for us to reallocate that money, which we’re doing now. Is it your position we as a city should have continued spending money to a provider that was not providing, even when deputies were saying it wasn’t working and we needed to go a different direction?

And second, regarding your stance to “re-adopt” (which I think gets into some murky issues of a non elected official trying to influence elected governance of another level of jurisdiction and acting politically, but put that a side for a minute) this ordinance is already in place and you are just choosing to not enforce it. Which you could start doing now. But, if your stance is for us to “re-adopt” our first ordinance, do we have your commitment and your agreement that our deputies will begin enforcing the timed tent regulation a part of that ordinance, as well as the locations folks aren’t allowed to put up tents? Are you saying that that will go into effect right away and the sheriff’s office will allow deputies to enforce that law immediately?

So I just want to get some clarity from you because you’ve been saying this in the community (outside of official channels of communication with myself or the city manager even after we’ve requested official sit downs with you multiple times). Please let me know, in writing right here, that if we were to “re-adopt”, the deputies will begin enforcing the timed tent regulation immediately and the Sheriff’s office will direct them to enforce it right away.

Thank you,Mayor Schilling

FROM: Sheriff Cole-Tindall [Wednesday, April 24, 2024 9:07 AM]Mayor Schilling,

KCSO will enforce the previous ordinance with a coordinated enforcement strategy that is like the one the City of Burien applied when that ordinance was in effect. This means that the Council would re-adopt the ordinance and would have a contract in place for appropriate social services. As with the previous ordinance, the Council should allow for coordination with the service provider(s) and notice to implement the ordinance. KCSO would begin notifying people of the new ordinance as early as the next day and coordinating with current and future service providers on an implementation plan. This approach is consistent with the legal framework that law enforcement agencies are working in and is how the former ordinance became effective. Sheriff Cole-Tindall

FROM: Mayor Kevin Schilling [Thursday, April 25, 2024 6:51 AM]Good morning Sheriff Cole-Tindall,

I’ve removed Shannon Braddock and Councilmember Mosqueda from my questions I’m going to send you here. I’m not really sure why they were included because neither, as far as I’m aware, has any involvement in the discussions taking place between the City and the Sheriff’s Department, especially since Ms. Braddock works for the County Executive. Is his office involved in some way that throughout this whole time in your communications you haven’t been upfront about?

I have a myriad of questions that I’d like clarity on from your response:

• “Will enforce the previous ordinance” which ordinance are you referring to?
• “Appropriate service providers” how are you defining this? Do you have any say on who the City Council chooses as our service provider? What if we were to select a service provider you deemed “inappropriate” and what would that look like?
• “Council should allow for coordination” why wouldn’t we? The council has always encouraged and wanted police and service providers to work together. In fact, the service provider the city manager chose was the service provider most appreciated by law enforcement. Where as the County service, REACH, was ineffective and we constantly heard from LEOs for the need to change course. This section of your email is also troubling. At this point, it’s seeming like you’re setting goal posts as an unelected member of the county government, trying to influence the internal operations of a city council. What happens if we don’t agree entirely with this? Will some be enforced and not others again? Will we see legal action again?
• “Enforcement strategy” can you clearly state what you’re anticipating this would look like?
• “Council will re-adopt the ordinance” the way council operates under our rules, this wouldn’t be simple and doesn’t make technical since, as the original ordinance is already adopted and in place.
• “Notifying of the new ordinance” why would there need to be a notification period of an ordinance that has been in effect for months that had already gone through the notice period? Is that standard procedure to re-notice a law that hasn’t changed? Seems like quite an mis use of time.
• Questions about process and operations: why is there an attempt to push us to “re-adopt” something that’s never been un-adopted or changed? The elements of the original ordinance are still in place and could be enforced right now by our deputies. If we were to work toward a path to enforcement for this, I’d want it to be enforced immediately since nothing has changed in its existence.

Thank you, I look forward to your responses. Mayor Schilling

FROM: Sheriff Cole- Tindall [Date: April 25, 2024 at 8:33:03 AM]Good morning, Mayor Schilling,

I am out of the office for the entire day but will work on replying to your email as soon as I can.Sheriff Cole-Tindall