The Longview City Council on July 22 adopted Ordinance 3564, amending sections of the Longview Municipal Code that regulate storage of personal property on public land. The ordinance was amended on the council floor and adopted after debate over how the code defines “excessive storage” and what counts as public property.

Council member Kendall proposed three amendments during the discussion. The first amendment removed an exception in the bulky-item definition that had excluded a “constructed tent” from the bulky-item category; council voted in favor of that amendment unanimously. The second amendment sought to remove subsection D from the definition of “excessive storage” — subsection D would have defined excessive storage to include items that “interfere with the ordinary use and enjoyment of public space by others.” That proposed removal initially failed on a 3–3 tie. Council suspended the rules later in the meeting, reconsidered the failed amendment, and the amendment passed on reconsideration. The third amendment simplified the definition of “public property” to a concise phrase: “all publicly owned and maintained or controlled property,” removing a longer list copied from another jurisdiction; that amendment passed unanimously.

City staff told the council the ordinance language had been adapted from another city and that some elements (piers, trails, museums, pools, beaches) did not map directly to Longview, prompting the proposed simplification. Staff said the task force working on the issue will be reconvened to continue conversations on document-recording fees and next steps, and that partner organizations have begun new collective conversations with the city.

Council members debated enforcement and vagueness. Several members expressed concern that a broadly worded clause about “interferes with ordinary use and enjoyment” could be subjective and difficult for staff and law enforcement to apply; staff acknowledged the clause had not been fully vetted for enforcement and said further research and education would be needed if the council retained that language. Those concerns were part of the reason council members moved the amendment, suspended rules to reconsider, and ultimately adopted the revised ordinance.

Motions to adopt Ordinance 3564 and to adopt floor amendments were moved, seconded and passed at various times during the deliberation; the final main motion to adopt the ordinance as amended carried on voice vote. (Individual mover/second names are not specified in the transcript for every procedural motion.)

The council directed staff to continue work with partner organizations and the reconvened task force to refine implementation and enforcement approaches.