Homelessness is on the rise in Seattle. People are dying by falling from illegal encampments perched dangerously perched above freeways. There continues to be a shortage of rental assistance and permanent housing for low-income and homeless people in the city. With that picture in mind, here’s something we could do right now: Allow more regulated homeless encampments, where people who’d otherwise be sleeping on the streets can form a community and get access to services.

Led by Council Member Mike O’Brien, the city council is having a hearing tonight on this very idea. It starts at 5:30 pm in council chambers at City Hall, and will be live-streamed here.

Today, encampments are only allowed on church property with a 3-month permit that can be extended to 6 months. That means locations are limited to religious institutions and they're forced to pack up and move at least twice a year. After Council Member Nick Licata tried and failed to get more regulated encampments in the city back in 2013, Mayor Ed Murray—with the help of a task force—finally got on board in January and sent a bill down to the council to allow three new encampments on either private or city-owned land. With Council Member Kshama Sawant having replaced Richard Conlin, it looks like the votes are there to pass this thing—even if those who voted against it last time stick to their positions.

Those positions, by the way, largely amount to some version of “We should be doing better for the homeless in our community than tents outside.” Yeah. We should. But we aren’t. Until we fix that, something must be done. As the Seattle Human Rights Commission argued in a recent letter to the council asking them to approve the plan: “Authorized tent encampments, while not a permanent solution to homelessness, help provide safety and reduce risk of harm for several hundred homeless individuals each night. With few other options immediately available and shelters at full capacity, tent encampments serve a crucial function by meeting basic human survival needs while improving the public safety and health of people experiencing homelessness who lack access to basic shelter.”

Here are the basics of the plan on the table: Social service agencies would find a potential spot to host a tent city (city-owned and private land are OK, as long as that land is close to transit and not in a residential zone) and apply to the city to oversee the site. The camp would be permitted for one year, and the agencies would be required to provide case workers for the encampment’s residents and collect basic demographic data about them. Meanwhile, the current church-hosted camps would be allowed to continue.

In the coming weeks before a full council vote, we’re likely to see a few proposed amendments to the bill, including one that would, if passed, allow camps in residential areas. (Some advocates and residents of current tent cities have described the no-residential-land rule as “redlining” the homeless into far flung industrial areas of the city.) That amendment is a long shot, even with the new council make up. Council members may also try to allow camps to stay longer than one year and redefine the areas they're allowed in to include public universities, because students from the University of Washington have reportedly expressed some interest in hosting a camp there.

But before they do any of that, the council wants to hear from you: 5:30 p.m. City Hall. Get down there already.