Encinitas advances proposals tightening rules on vehicle camping

ENCINITAS — The Encinitas City Council voted to advance three proposals that address homelessness by tightening restrictions on vehicle camping and overnight parking.

At its Aug. 13 meeting, the council directed staff to draft ordinances based on three proposals, two from Councilmember Jim O’Hara and one from O’Hara and Councilmember Marco San Antonio.

One measure removes the words “at night” from the city’s ordinance on camping on private property, extending the ban to all hours.

“The current public property ordinance is 24-hours-a-day,” O’Hara said. “All this does is it aligns [the ordinance for private property] with what we have on our public property.”

Sheriff’s Capt. Shane Watts, of the North Coastal Station, said the current rules create loopholes. Officers can address vehicles illegally camping on public property, but lose authority once the car moves to nearby private property.

Watts said if “they’re resource resistant and then they just moved their location to an adjacent private property, we now do not have the legal authority to intervene.”

The council unanimously agreed to advance the changes to the drafting stage.

Another proposal would expand the city’s ban on sleeping in vehicles from the current 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. to 6 a.m.

O’Hara said the change is not about punishing people but providing more time to connect those experiencing homelessness with resources. The initial proposal to extend the ban from “dusk to dawn” was revised to 8 p.m. following a suggestion from Mayor Bruce Ehlers to avoid confusion.

The council voted 4-1 to move the measure forward Aug. 13, with Councilmember Joy Lyndes opposed, saying the current hours were adequate.

During public comment, resident Elizabeth Whitaker said she believed the policies would “punish poverty under the guise of law and order.”

“These policies may look good on paper, sound impressive on the morning news and offer ego-stroking sound bites, but they do nothing to address the root causes of homelessness, economic inequity and hardship or community safety,” Whitaker said. “They are optics.”

The third proposal would prohibit RVs from parking on public streets between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m., expanding the current restriction of 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. The measure was tabled Aug. 13 after concerns about early-morning surfers but passed 4-1 on Aug. 20, with Lyndes dissenting.

Lyndes argued the city should focus on its Homeless Action Plan instead of imposing additional regulations.

San Antonio said the proposal stemmed from resident complaints and required careful consideration. Ehlers said the city should examine expanding exemptions for residents.

The city’s actions follow similar moves in neighboring cities. On March 4, the Carlsbad City Council advanced an ordinance prohibiting individuals from living in vehicles on public property, following city data that showed the number of people living in cars nearly doubled between 2023 and 2024.

Carlsbad officials framed the measure as a balance of enforcement and outreach, with police pledging progressive warnings and social service referrals before issuing citations.

Councilmember Luke Shaffer expressed mixed feelings about a strict RV parking ban, noting his experience as a surfer.

“If we look down Leucadia – down 101 – there’s a very specific demographic that is parking along the train tracks there,” Shaffer said. “And we’ve had a number of complaints – specifically about a type of vehicle that looks like they live out of their van or they look like they’re living out of their truck. That’s it. It’s a different look.”

Shaffer said that rundown vehicles can create a negative impression for families in the community, adding that a “slightly run-down” older vehicle parked on a public street “isn’t what I want my son or daughter walking past at 6 or 8 in the morning.”

“I don’t find it scary,” he said of RVs near Swami’s Beach. “But the wrong people could be staying there sometimes, that just doesn’t make you feel so cozy.”

Ehlers pushed back against comments that appeared to focus on profiling based on appearances.

“I’m not supportive of that and I don’t think anybody up here is,” Ehlers said. “But – you know – some of our discussion tonight [made] it sound that way. And I want to call that out and say, ‘no, that’s not the intent.’”

He added he was “not trying to profile anybody.”

Shaffer later clarified.

“I was not trying to stereotype,” he said. “But – as the mayor just said – there is profiling that is required.”

Shaffer compared it to his service in the Marine Corps, where he said profiling was necessary “for obviously good reasons” to protect law enforcement and residents from “negative actors and the people that we don’t necessarily want in our city.”