Photo by Devin Smith.

The Council today approved a bill that defines the term “private room” as it applies to homeless families who seek shelter during the winter, despite objections from Mayor Vincent Gray.

Between February 3 and March 23 of last year, the city sheltered homeless families in recreation centers, with beds placed in between rolling partitions without a door. A D.C. Superior Court Judge ruled against the practice in March, and the city has since complied with the ruling, though an appeal is pending.

The Dignity for Homeless Families Amendment Act of 2014, which passed on the Council’s consent agenda Tuesday, defines “private room” as part of a building with “four non-portable walls, a ceiling, and a floor that meet at the edges so as to be continuous and uninterrupted,” a “door that locks from within as its main point of access,” sufficient insulation, lighting the occupants can turn on and off and access to hot shower facilities. The bill amends the definition in the Homeless Services Reform Act of 2005.

As part of the appeal, city attorneys are scheduled to next appear in D.C. Superior Court in February 2015 to argue against the ruling on “private rooms.” In a brief filed in August, city attorneys argued that “plaintiffs cannot succeed on their claim that they have a judicially enforceable entitlement to apartment-style shelter or private rooms during severe weather condition because it is contrary to the plain language of the Homeless Services Reform Act.”

In a letter to Council Chair Phil Mendelson, Mayor Vincent Gray urged the Council to reject the bill as it “will simply codify a failed policy.”

“The bill will mandate significant additional investment in the shelter at the expense of investment in affordable housing and other more permanent housing solutions,” Gray said of the expected costs. “It will throw the District back to an era when streets were line with hotels filled with homeless families.”

Rooms at D.C. General, the city’s largest family homeless shelter, do not meet the definition in the bill. Gray said the bill’s requirements “raise the specter that the District will be unable to comply” and will be open to other lawsuits and fines “that will deplete the city’s resources to invest in lasting solutions.”

A decision on a possible veto has not been made, according to Gray’s spokesperson.