Ruling: City can be liable for problems at Tucson homeless camp

The city can be held liable for the “public nuisance” caused by a homeless camp in a Tucson neighborhood on the north side, the Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled. Bradford v. City of Tucson

The ongoing legal case stems from a 2023 lawsuit against the city filed by residents of Hedrick Acres, near East Fort Lowell Road and North Campbell Avenue, who claimed the city’s inaction in dealing with a homeless camp in Navajo Wash created a nuisance.

The ruling overturns a lower court decision that said the city had taken reasonable steps to abate the nuisance caused by camping in the Navajo Wash, and affirmed the trial court's decision that two of the three plaintiffs had adequate standing to sue the city. 

In a ruling authored by Presiding Judge Michael Kelly, the appeals court acknowledged the city’s efforts through its protocols for enforcement against encampments, but disagreed with the trial court’s conclusion that it is not liable for the nuisance conditions in Navajo Wash.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

“The City need not consent to the nuisance conditions themselves in order to be liable for a public nuisance on its land,” the ruling says. Because city officials knew of camps in the wash and that it was an ongoing problem, Tucson could be held liable, and the plaintiffs can seek injunctive relief, the court says.

“I think it was the right decision,” said Adrian Wurr, a resident of the neighborhood and one of the people who sued. “And more importantly, as a neighborhood, we’re just looking forward to being able to move on with our lives and having a little more clarity about what’s going to happen in Navajo Wash.”

“Hopefully the city will abate the nuisance. For us, the Navajo Wash is a pocket park that we established. We built it, and we have a lot of pride of ownership, because it’s our only park, it’s our only open space. So it really hurt when we couldn’t use it,” Wurr said. “We want to be able to use the space as a public space. So that’s what I hope for in the future. That’s mostly why we undertook this lawsuit.”

An attorney for the city could not be immediately reached Friday for comment.