As someone who has lived right next to the Yesler "encapments" for three years, clean them the fuck up for good already. For the most part these people don't want shelter/sobriety/jobs/a way out of their lifestyle. They want to keep partying. At this point, providing them with houses in which we allow them to continue to party on our dime seems a lot better than them fucking one another and shitting in plain view of us sorry-ass working taxpayers every day.

Our money is already basically ignited the moment local government gets their hands on it, so if we're going to waste, let's waste it on this.

@1: Since this is the way you feel, why don't you move elsewhere?

@2: Maybe RentBoy is not financially secure to move away or change his lifestyle, like the homeless people the city is trying to protect. Assuming he can just move away is kind of a privileged viewpoint, is it not? You would not just tell the homeless to grab their bootstraps and move away, would you?

Disclaimer: This comment does not create an endorsement of RentBoy's comments, including, but not limited to, his comment @1.

@3: That was my point.

This is fauxnews-level journalism.

"the mayor's ongoing controversial sweeps of illegal tent encampments."
'Source' links to her own prior article. Come on!

Bagshaw has actually floated the idea of 3 separate notices before peoples' stuff is "cleaned up" and thrown away, and I think she gets why some people would rather sleep in a tent in a greenbelt than sleep in a brick-and-mortar shelter. Burgess is the absolute close-minded jerk on this issue.

Huh, I guess I missed the news that anyone anywhere was expecting any sign of stopping encampment sweeps.

I suppose there's reason to dislike the city's anti-camping laws, but how about trying to do something to repeal those laws instead of trying to push this weird whisper campaign to suggest the city is about to stop enforcing those laws any day now?