News Aug 22, 2022 at 11:26 am

Imminent Sweep Destabilizes Found Family at Aurora Encampment

The City will sweep Cuba for the third time this year. This time, they won't just uproot him, they'll take him from his garden of onions, tomatoes, bell peppers, apples, lemons, and cactus. HK

Comments

1

Wait until the neighbors steal or wreck something of yours, Ms. Krieg, and then your tune will be different.

2

"The City will sweep Cuba for the third time this year. This time, they won't just uproot him, they'll take him from his garden of onions, tomatoes, bell peppers, apples, lemons, and cactus. HK"

Sorry Hannah, can't get my heart to bleed over that disingenuous ploy. But I do hope Cuba can harvest what he can.

3

"While Cuba said he would be open to moving to an RV safe lot, he said the lot would have to allow him to continue living on his own terms. After all, he said, he is too old for a babysitter."

This is the rub, isn't it. Hard to convince Mr. & Mrs. Seattle Taxpayer that beggars, indeed, can be choosers.

4

@3 They’re not beggars. They’re not begging for anything other than to be left alone. They could build their own housing for themselves and each other if you wouldn’t keep demanding the cops raid the camps, which makes crime more likely and harder to track in the first place

5

@1 how are you still not creative enough to realize that sweeps are the least effective way to deal with theft and harken back to European treatment of Jews and Romani (gypsies) and American attacks on Black communities as collective punishment of an entire area for suspected crime by an individual or small group?
You seriously can’t think of another way to address theft?

@2 what’s disingenous about it?

7

I live near this encampment, seems like a dangerous situation for everyone. A couple of nights ago I heard 6 gunshots coming from that direction at 3am.

8

Cuba is hard working apparently. On his terms. And wants to live. On his terms (no babysitter for him!).

Being a part of society means following rules so we call can work and live together. He doesn't want to be a part of society. So why live in a big city? Usually it's because of access to drugs.

If I decide to take over some land belonging to one of those big houses in Madison Park and plant my little vegetable garden, does that give me the right to stay there? Why does the Hannah keep peddling the belief that people should be able to park their crap wherever they want, do whatever they want, create unsafe conditions (I'm sure the RV and additions are up to code) and we are all supposed to say "Great! Here's some money for you to keep living irresponsibly!"?

10

Here's a conundrum for Stranger writers: What if the residents of this encampment were using gasoline-powered leaf blowers? Like every morning, starting at 6AM? What should be done?

11

Today I learned that homeless people in Seattle are really homesteaders.

13

4: I wasn’t commenting on the effectiveness of sweeps, rather, I was just noting that people have all the care and concern for the homeless until it’s their neighborhood or their stuff that gets stolen then it’s “throw the book” time. It’s akin to the old saying (paraphrasing) kids and money turn liberals into conservatives.

14

@shoobop "dickheads" "fuck off" "bullshit" "fucking" "dickheads". Klassy!

100% of your unhoused neighbors are considerate? Is that before or after their propane tank explodes or you step on the needles? Or their "fuel and human waste" flows into the creek?

"Mind your own fucking business" and reach a hand down to your neighbors? Which is it?

16

@3/8:

Yeah, too bad the the indigenous peoples of North America didn't have similar laws in place when white people suddenly started showing up and stealing land that had already been populated for tens of thousands of years, amiright? I mean, why couldn't the white people assimilate into the already established society they found when they got here? I guess, in your minds, "being part of society" just means adhering to the rules of YOUR society, which is the only one that really matters. But, even if that's the case, they're just doing exactly the same thing your ancestors did to the people who were here before them, only now you're on the poking end of the stick for a change. Sucks, doesn't it?

18

@15:

But, does "removed" actually MEAN removed or does it really mean "we just shuffled them around from where they were to somewhere else they'll eventually be 'removed' again to make the numbers suggest something is being done, but where in reality NOTHING is being done to address the root problem that creates the need to incessantly sweep in the first place"?

19

@17:

Funny, because I'll bet most of those whose land was stolen never agreed to those terms. It's only white "manifest destiny" arrogance that decrees land they took can't be taken back.

20

I hope the city has some bus tickets to Miami to hand out, to help get these guys home. It is pretty telling that the nicknames are always place names: “Cuba”, “Miami”, “Tex” and “Phoenix”. Time for a camping and homesteading ban.

22

@16: That's some really contorted whataboutism you got goin' there.

24

Interesting to see some commentary that Seattle was not like this before... homelessness wasn't an issue... It was. Time for Mr Pike Place commenter and others to visit MOHAI.

The location homeless people shelter has changed however. We need to be cognizant that local transportation departments have fenced off the underpasses and the Marine Security rules cordoned off traditional areas for homeless people to shelter in Seattle. I remember working on the Ballard ship canal in the early 1980s stacking pallets and there were large encampments. This homelessness isn't new, just changed location because of new rules and fences. Likely other industries have tightened security rules as well.

Another big change was the Reagan revolution decimated the mental healthcare system nationwide starting in the 1980s. We're a generation into that cruel experiment. Our nation went from Best Care in the world to what we have now. That left people with untreated mental illness to fend for themselves.

25

Somebody get this man some RV park brochures.

27

The typical right-wing bleating in this comment section is unsurprising. Yes, someone with Cuba's skills in maintenance should be employed and housed, but the fact that he is without a home to begin with is the preventing factor. No, homeless people aren't homesteaders, but camping in such a sophisticated way off Aurora, a polluted highway, is hardly ruining the neighborhood. Fentanyl slums are a different story but adding a garden is more helpful to the neighborhood than harmful.

Oh well. Better journalizing than your usual, Hannah.

28

@26

That's a lot of words, and quite well-expressed, to say "I'm an old dumbass."

Just to correct you, and I hope I come off as pedantic here, the "art deco" hospital you're referring to is not on the south side of Beacon Hill. It is in North Beacon Hill, literally as far north as you can possible get on the hill.

That error combined with your comment about "graffiti along the highways" being a new ailment has led your rant to be dismissed. Thanks for trying - opinions aside, you wrote well - now move to a nursing home in Lake Stevens.

29

@24: Fact check alert. Ronald Reagan got blamed for implanting federal law that enabled inmates to keep people locked up against their will. The Lanterman-Petris-Short Act was regarded by some as a “patient's bill of rights” and a humanitarian victory at the time.

Some mental institutions where downright horrible beyond belief.

God Bless Ronald Reagan

30

*enabled institutions to keep...

34

In an excellent complement to this article, most of the questions by the fashy trolls above are answered. Surprise! It’s our systems failing. If you want to know why Cuba is in Seattle, how his situation got to be this way, and what his real name is, click here https://www.realchangenews.org/news/2022/07/27/their-own-words-my-dream-was-not-come-america-and-be-homeless-or-do-drugs-or-create

35

@34 -- thank you for the article. It explains that Cuba could be in a tiny house, but just doesn't want to. So rather than our systems failing, Cuba is an example of someone refusing to use them.

It's interesting how digging deeper into the reality of Seattle's homeless population almost inevitably wrecks the narrative of The Stranger.

37

Didn't we learn recently that urban gardening is actually a form of hostile architecture designed to keep our unhoused neighbors from having a place to rest?

https://www.thestranger.com/city/2022/08/10/77633170/guerrilla-gardening-enters-seattles-war-on-the-homeless

Cuba's garden should not be celebrated but condemned for the affront to the homeless community that it is.

38

On the "Regan decimated mental health in the 80's" point, it's now 2022. It's long past time to stop blaming Regan, and start blaming all the elected officials who came after him and failed to fix this problem.

39

I hope cooler heads prevailed at city hall and this encampment wasn't swept as scheduled. It doesn't seem to be bothering anyone and let's not forget we're in an emergency situation with regard both to Covid and an acute shortage of suitable housing, both permanent and temporary. Sweeping an evidently stable, out-of-the-way encampment like this one, with no appropriate housing available, would just add to the city's already severely backlogged caseload while needlessly disrupting the residents' lives. It makes sense only if that disruption is the whole point. But that can't be true in Seattle ... right?

40

@39 -- thing is, the article posted @34 discusses the subject of this Slog post and indicates he's been offered housing. He didn't want it. Now that's obviously his choice, but saying that the person profiled here is in an emergency because of an acute lack of housing simply isn't true considering he was given a chance to be housed.

Should we let vagrancy run rampant in the city because people don't feel like going into the housing they're offered? I think the last election says the majority of the public pretty clearly believes the answer is no. The Stranger obviously believes the answer is yes. And that's how we end up with articles like this one, advocating for policies the voters don't support.

41

@40
A tiny home is not Housing. I’m not talking about aesthetically or the size of the structure, although that would be true also. it’s not even legally treated as Housing, it’s usually temporary and it never has eviction protections like everybody else. He needs to be equal rights, not some civil unions equivalent “skim milk marriage“ was the term I think half equivalent.
The last election was the result of misinformation about people turning down housing when they were actually just turning down shelter. I wouldn’t go into shelter either. I would hold out for equal rights.

42

@36 The people who own most of the land in Seattle didn’t either. Have you forgotten private property here is less than two centuries old? He doesn’t need help other than to mitigate the damage the city is doing and that is far from remedied by that half ass options the city offers or claims to offer homeless people being forced to move.

43

@37 The 96th and Aurora garden was specifically created to stop people from living there. That’s what makes it hostile architecture, not the fact that it’s a garden. I think you knew that, unless you’re even dumber than you sound. Which means you think we are, which is kind of the same thing. Or have a terrible sense of humor.

44

@39 He was offered a tiny house, which is obviously unsuited to his needs (in his case, absurdly so). There's no shortage of people eager to get into a tiny house. While personally I don't consider them real housing, they hold an undeniable appeal for a certain subset of the unhoused population, i.e., those with few possessions and who lack Cuba's outdoor survival skills. Therefore it makes perfect sense, if Cuba and company are content where they are and not actively harming anyone, to leave them alone at least for now and offer the house to someone for whom it would be a much better fit. Why create a problem where none exists?

BTW, "vagrancy" is a term with historically strong racial overtones that you might want to consider excising from your 2022 vocabulary -- especially since the behavior it describes stopped being illegal around the same time integrated drinking fountains did.

45

@41 -- got it. So there's housing (which you call shelter) it's just not good enough and has rules preventing people living there from doing certain things, like, say, dope. In other words, we need to provide really nice accommodations for the homeless -- nicer than the non-homeless -- while also allowing the formerly homeless to continue to do drugs. Right?

Congrats, it's perspectives like this that got a Republican elected citywide in Seattle for the first time in decades.

47

@4: “They could build their own housing for themselves and each other…”

Yes, homeless persons building un-permitted structures to no construction codes, with materials scavenged from god-knows-where: what could possibly go wrong?

“…if Cuba and company are content where they are and not actively harming anyone, to leave them alone at least for now…”

And if any of the dozens of persons in this fire-trap meet horrible ends, you’ll feel great about that? (And @4 etc. will promptly blame Seattle for allowing it to happen.)

We have building and occupancy codes for right and good reasons, often based in painful deaths which were completely preventable. Natter on about history and rights all you want, but allowing people who already don’t like following rules to live in such conditions invites disaster.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.