Five years into King County's 10-year plan to end homelessness, some local advocates for the homeless say the campaign is failing. Homelessness has increased, emergency services like food banks and shelters are overtaxed, and, they argue, a new city proposal could make life harder for the homeless. Under a controversial proposed code of conduct, the city would hold new powers to banish people from city parks.

"The 10-year plan isn't working," says Peggy Hotes, a spokeswoman for Seattle Housing and Resource Effort (SHARE). "More people are losing their jobs and homes." Several groups (including SHARE, Real Change newspaper, the nomadic homeless encampment Nickelsville, and the Women's Housing Equality and Enhancement League) declared a state of emergency for homeless people in Seattle in late December.

But the growing problem is largely invisible to the city's denizens. In late January, the annual One Night Count of people without shelter in King County showed a 5 percent drop from 2009, or 152 fewer people when excluding areas that weren't counted last year.

The count is misleading, says Hotes, because "the city's done things that chase people out of their normal spots, so they're being more secretive." (The homeless count found 84 people in areas not counted last year, and it didn't include people living in shelters. Directors of the count concede that it is an "undercount.") Hotes adds, "It's not attributable to there being less homeless on the streets."

A resident of Nickelsville named Suze agrees. "Yeah, I think the number's wrong. There are always places to hide. The more they sweep, the better people get at hiding."

Meanwhile, many homeless people hide in Seattle's vast network of parks. But even there, the city may soon sweep them out.

On February 11, Seattle Parks and Recreation's board of commissioners votes on a code of conduct that many argue would further ostracize Seattle's homeless population. In addition to embracing a full ban on smoking or chewing tobacco in any park—punishable by 1 to 30 days banishment depending on the level of offense—the code also takes other measures. It would also define already illegal behavior—"Camping in any park unless specifically approved by the Superintendent; Improper use of restrooms (e.g., no bathing or showering, except in designated facilities, and no washing clothes, sleeping, or eating); Leaving packages, backpacks, luggage, or other personal items unattended while the owner is not in the same area of the park or inside the facility"—to explicitly ban violators.

"People are under the mistaken impression that outlawing people in public spaces will make them go away," says Alison Eisinger, director of the Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness, which coordinated the One Night Count. "In reality, it makes an already difficult life incredibly hard. Regulations that restrict a person's access to drinking water or use of a public restroom are unconscionable and unacceptable in a civilized society."

Drawing roughly 200 testimonials from citizens, according to parks commission chair Jackie Ramels, the proposal has already undergone major reconstruction; a ban on spitting and rules that would limit users from opposite-sex restrooms were redacted after opposition from chronic salivators and the transgender community. But the other provisions, many seeming to target behaviors of homeless people, remain in the proposal.

Particularly given the current economy, ending homelessness in King County, or at least eliminating chronic homelessness by 98 percent by 2014, sounds like a quixotic goal—more like a great sound bite than an objective. However, Bill Block, project director of the Committee to End Homelessness, insists it's working. So well, in fact, that King County's 10-year plan is being treated as a national model for similar programs. "Out of our goal of 9,500 new housing units, we've opened 3,000 units and have 800 in the pipeline."

So are the homeless really in a state of emergency, as some claim? "The difficulty is declaring a state of emergency within a state of emergency," says Eisinger.

"A lot of the argument is over emergency shelter," adds Block. "I guess I'm completely sympathetic with [Hotes's] impatience, but it's not to say that [the 10-year plan] isn't working."

However, advocates do agree that the proposed parks code of conduct would have particularly onerous impacts on homeless people in Seattle.

Asked about those concerns, parks commissioner vice-chair Neal Adams remains wishy-washy. "Where I am, personally, is—I'm undecided. I think we all ask ourselves to what extent does this present a significant issue. If it truly is a significant issue, it will help me make a better vote."