‘No Camping’ ordinance discussed Monday at Colorado Springs City Council

The city’s ordinance prohibiting camping on public property, a ban primarily directed at the homeless, was discussed at a work session Monday by the Colorado Springs City Council.

Council president Richard Skorman said among the issues is a high E. coli bacteria count in Monument Creek, south of Bijou Street.

“I know the mayor is concerned about that,” Skorman said. “We don’t know if the bacteria is coming from (human waste at) homeless camps, or from somewhere else. There are some septic systems on the north end of the creek.”

Skorman said the council may consider amending the ordinance to prohibit camping a certain distance from the creek.

The city adopted the “no camping” ordinance in 2010, but police said they generally haven’t enforced it because of a lack of available space in local shelters.

The shelter space requirement became part of the enforcement policy to avoid violating the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishment.

But Frederick Stein, a senior attorney with the city attorney’s office, said shelter space requirement is enforced when the weather is warmer, and violators are cited for trespassing.

“Last year, police issued more than 130 citations,” he said. “This year, police have issued 17 so far.”

Stein also answered questions from the council about what authorities legally can and can’t do to violators.

“Police will respond whether a violator is on public or private property and whether it’s owned by the city, county, state or federal government,” he said.

Stein also said police have reduced the time required for a violator to leave after receiving a warning from 48 hours to 24 hours.

Police Chief Pete Carey said responding to a trespassing complaint is normally a low-priority call.

“If someone is in danger of injury, then we’d respond immediately,” he said. “And when we respond, we stay until that person has left the premises.”

The local homelessness issue will be discussed further Wednesday night at a public forum at the Pinery in Colorado Springs.

In other matters, the council heard a plan to accept 17 acres donated for future use by the police department as a firing range, to replace the current range at Pikes Peak Community College.

The property is along Interstate 25 south of the city and just north of the Pikes Peak International Raceway.

The raceway’s owner is willing to donate five acres to provide access to the property.

The council will have its first vote on the plan in two weeks.

Finally, in a heated exchange during Monday’s work session, Councilman Bill Murray received a stern scolding from council members Skorman and Jill Gaebler regarding a negotiation between the city and Nor’wood, a local developer.

The city and Nor’wood have been in negotiations since 2015 to settle a disagreement over Banning Lewis Ranch, a subdivision in the northeastern corner of the city.

“Nor’wood took over the ranch from the previous developers who went bankrupt 10 years ago,” Murray said. “But now, they (Nor’wood) don’t want to honor the original annexation agreement — which means they don’t want to build it up as much because they won’t make as much of a profit. And we don’t want to get stuck paying the bill for it.”

Murray also is upset that the negotiations have been held in private.

“So everything is attorney-client privilege between our city attorney and Nor’wood,” he said. “The public and the council aren’t being kept properly informed. We’re only updated during executive sessions.”

On Monday, Murray asked for the council to vote during its regular meeting on Tuesday on whether to accept Nor’wood’s offer in the negotiations.

That brought a swift response.

“You’re not acting like someone who wants to resolve this,” Gaebler said. “You walk out of executive sessions, you grandstand to get media attention and you’re trying to disrupt the process.”

Skorman expressed a similar view.

“I don’t understand the point of you saying this,” he said.

The council defeated Murray’s request on a 6-3 vote.

“The council didn’t ask for these negotiations,” he said. “The mayor’s office, this was their doing.”

Murray said a judge previously refused an attempt by Nor’wood to win the matter in court, and the developer is now using the threat of an appeal as leverage in the negotiations.