Separate HB 2266 permanent supportive housing and shelter code changes from the July 21 vote/ Commentary

Published 1:30 pm Monday, July 20, 2026

By Linnea Augustine

Special to the Reporter

I respectfully ask the Mercer Island City Council to take three actions before the final vote on July 21:

1. Remove the HB 2266-related permanent supportive housing (PSH) and shelter code changes from the July 31 Growth Management Act compliance package and vote on them separately.

2. Adopt only the comprehensive plan and associated code changes needed to address the four issues in the 2025 Growth Management Hearings Board ruling under HB 1220. Bring the HB 2266-specific code changes back separately before June 2028.

3. Do not rush to remove the existing conditions on homeless shelters in every residential zone when neither HB 1220 nor HB 2266 requires shelters to be allowed island-wide. Keep shelters in zones where hotels are allowed unless the city shows that more zones are needed to accommodate the required 237 emergency housing beds.

The proposed code changes would remove the conditional-use permit and the 600-foot separation requirement from schools, daycares, parks and other places where children gather. For PSH and shelter projects that would otherwise require a public hearing, the changes would replace that hearing with approval by city staff.

The city is combining two separate decisions in one package for the 7/21 vote: 1) corrections required by the 2025 ruling and 2) PSH and shelter code changes based on a law that took effect last month.

The July 31 deadline comes from the 2025 Growth Management Hearings Board ruling on Mercer Island’s 2024 comprehensive plan. The board ordered the city to correct four issues under the Growth Management Act and HB 1220: land capacity, adequate provisions for affordable housing, the Station Area Subarea Plan and anti-displacement measures.

HB 2266 did not take effect until June 11, 2026, and was not part of the 2025 ruling. The ruling did not direct the city to remove the shelter permit, public-hearing process or separation rule. The July 31 deadline applies to the corrections ordered by the board under HB 1220.

The state gives cities until June 2028 to formally update their local codes for HB 2266. The city may choose to adopt those changes now, but the earlier ruling does not require the city to adopt them on 7/21. The city attorney should clearly separate the changes required by the 2025 ruling from the new HB 2266 changes.

At the farmers market last week, our state representatives said they were surprised by how HB 2266 limits cities’ authority over PSH locations and safety requirements and by how quickly Mercer Island is implementing it. They also said cities usually take a couple of years to update their codes and that they had not heard concerns from the city about this new law.

Separating the HB 2266 changes would not suspend the state law. It would give the city time to determine what protections can legally remain, hold public discussions, complete a separate legal analysis, and bring the changes back for a vote before June 2028. It would also give state lawmakers time to address unintended consequences and residents time to advocate.

Mercer Island already allows homeless shelters in every zone, including residential neighborhoods, but only through a conditional-use permit and with conditions such as the 600-foot separation rule. The proposed changes would remove the permit, the pre-decision public hearing tied to it, and the 600-foot rule. Because state law does not require shelters in every residential zone, the island-wide allowance is within the city’s discretion. The council should explain why those protections should be removed on 7/21.

This is not theoretical. Mercer Island’s plan calls for 178 permanent supportive housing units and 237 emergency housing beds. It also identifies two potential city-owned sites and discusses possible public funding and partnerships. Projects could include large developments or residential properties converted into scattered-site PSH. Even if the law changes next year, projects already well into the approval process may still move forward under the rules adopted on 7/21.

I appreciate the city council’s work on this issue and its request that residents advocate at the state level. However, the council’s vote on 7/21 will determine whether residents actually have time to do that.

Before removing these existing protections and public-hearing requirements, residents deserve a separate public process and clear answers about where PSH and shelters would be allowed, what safety measures would apply, and who would be responsible for their operation and oversight.