WA State Supreme Court sides with city of Lacey on parking limit for RVs
The Washington state Supreme Court weighed in on whether or not a parking ordinance that restricts the length of time recreational vehicles can be parked in Lacey violates a state constitutional right to intrastate travel.
The answer from state justices Wednesday in Potter v. City of Lacey was decidedly no.
“(Plaintiff) has failed to show that Lacey’s parking ordinance violates his asserted state constitutional right to reside in the manner that he has chosen,” State Supreme Court Justices noted in their decision.
In 2019, the city of Lacey restricted to four hours the amount of time large vehicles such as RVs can be parked on city streets and lots, leading some to question if the restrictions were so broad that it would punish those living out of their vehicles because they are houseless.
At the heart of the lawsuit is Jack Potter, a now 67-year-old veteran who was living out of his truck and trailer on public streets and in a parking lot across from Lacey City Hall after being unable to secure a more stable living situation.
The city ordered Potter to move his vehicle. He then filed a lawsuit claiming that the new provision violated his “right to reside,” arguing that it was inherent in the state constitutional right to intrastate travel.
Potter’s claim noted that “by adopting and enforcing laws, policies and customs that make it unlawful for the homeless people living in their vehicles to live in the City of Lacey, the Defendants have deprived the Plaintiff of his right to freedom of travel guaranteed by the Washington Constitution.”
“Defendants have denied Plaintiff his state constitutional right not to travel to another city within Washington State and not to live elsewhere in Washington State,” the claim continued.
State Supreme Court Justices did not agree.
“Potter has not established that his claimed right to reside inheres in a Washington state constitutional right to intrastate travel or that it protects his preferred method of residing in Lacey: by siting his 23-foot trailer on a public street in violation of generally applicable parking ordinances,” justices wrote in the 13-page opinion.
The decision released Wednesday noted that the city of Lacey punishes violations of the parking restrictions with a $35 fine and immediate impoundment of the vehicle.
While the lawsuit began in Thurston County Superior Court, it was later moved to U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.
The federal district court granted summary judgment to Lacey with its claims, and decided that the parking ordinance did not impede on the right to exist in a public area.
“It is a parking ordinance that is applicable to all people in Lacey, resident or not, and only by extension does it restrict the manner in which a person can live in Lacey,” the federal district court wrote. “The right to travel does not, however, include a right to live in a certain manner.”
Potter later appealed the district court’s decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which then asked the State Supreme Court to analyze the claims.
