One year later, we're still here. Thank you, Seattle, for your resilience and readership throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Contributions from our readers are a crucial lifeline for The Stranger as we write our new future. We're calling up legislators, breaking down what's going on at Seattle City Hall, and covering the region's enduring arts scenes thanks to assistance from readers like you. If The Stranger is an essential part of your life, please make a one-time or recurring contribution today to ensure we're here to serve you tomorrow.
We're so grateful for your support.
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.
Sign up for the latest news and to win free tickets to events
Buy tickets to events around Seattle
Comprehensive calendar of Seattle events
The easiest way to find Seattle's best events
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Comments
• The program would apply to cars and trucks on residential streets, but only to RVs in industrial areas, not residential neighborhoods.
You know, I never did see the corrected maps issued by the proponents of public-land-camping reported in The Stranger. Possibly because there weren't any maps, and those proponents weren't willing to specify which bits of public land would be campable?
This time around, I see you're scare-quoting some alarmist language:
OK, if that's a mischaracterization, which part of it is inaccurate or misleading? Do we just need to add the modifier "residential" between the words "all streets?" Or under the proposed legislation, would people living in cars not be granted the right to claim public residential parking spaces for their own private use for up to a year at a time?
(Posh circumstances, I know! I'd be as tempted as you are to go homeless if I had such luxury offered for free!)
I think the idea is that if all of the sanitation needs are concentrated into designated car-camping lots, the City has to provide extra services... but if the needs are dispersed to the neighborhoods, existing street-sweeping, trash collection, and neighborhood volunteer programs will be sufficient.
Whether that's a good idea or not is, I would guess, a bit contentious.
For some reason, The Stranger chopped off half of the infographic when they copied it from The AllHome Report (pdf, the graphic is on page 8). The other 53% are the 30% in "Emergency Shelters" and 23% in "Transitional Housing or Safe Haven."
You could fit it into less than half of Terminal 5.
Supposedly there are a lot of large-enough unused city-owned (T5 is of course owned by the Port of Seattle, not the City of Seattle) sites as well. I'm willing to believe that, but the people who tell me so have never been able to point one out on a map when I've asked.
That's assuming your RV is roadworthy enough to make it all the way there from its current berth on Harbor Ave SW. I have my doubts.
Plus, remember a few years ago when Nebraska passed a law saying you could drop off unwanted children without any hassle at hospitals? And people started driving up to a thousand miles to get rid of their *teenagers*? The never-going-to-be-an-option-anyway Terminal 5 will fill up in a few months as all of Washington state's RV campers head to where the going is good. Where you going to put them then?
I know not all the homeless should be lumped into this category and demonized, but if they weren't homeless RVs and let's just say these were garbage trucks being parked in front of your house for days at a time people would be annoyed and asking for a rule to keep big garbage trucks from parking in front of their house. Add in this sense that too many of these RV dwellers are living in RVs because their addictions and criminal records are keeping them out of regular housing and can you really be surprised that homeowners don't want to deal with them in front of their houses?
About $1750 per month at a 20 space lot. It sounds like a lot, but a recent cost estimate for RV parking at the (closed) Yankee Diner parking lot in Ballard included $19,000 per month for 24 hour supervision.
Really??? It seems like civil service folks are jumping on on any assistance program that comes by with their hands out. Why does a parking lot need 24 hour supervision? There certainly won't be 24 hour supervision when people park in neighborhoods or empty lots. The occasional drive-through by a police patrol should be enough to keep the peace. $19,000 per month will practically get you a Seattle City Light superintendent on that job.
The going rate for RV parking is $500 per month at a facility that is too high class to allow typical clapped-out homeless RVs in their facility. And this includes water, power and sewage pump-outs. Plus an attendant on site. But not a $19,000 per month attendant.
Face it. The homeless problem is being milked by the by the civil service unions and there is no way the city can solve the problems until that pig gets it's fill.
Are you volunteering to pick up the piles of products from those "sanitation needs" that are going to be left on your neighborhood streets? My guess is that most of the RV campers are not going to be swinging by authorized pump-out stations every few days, and those living in cars don't have toilets anyway. I predict that most neighborhoods are not going to tolerate people crapping in their streets and this will lead to some serious strife.
My understanding from O'Brien is that people who register for this program will be expected to adhere to certain rules regarding noise, trash, etc. If the city actually enforces that, I'm all for it. But color me skeptical.
But I'll paraphrase myself: NIMBY's, gentrifiers and hipsters - they are always somebody else.
1. Endlessly harass, disrupt, homeless people, increasing their unpayable debts to the state though endless citations.
2. .......
3. Homelessness crisis solved!
But the city is too cowardly to come up with an actual solution (cause it would involve $$$), so the best they can do is weaken laws. Give people a place to park their cars that has sanitation stations (trash, washroom, showers) and social services. Not this bullshit. Basically the city is saying over and over again that they have no vision and have no courage, so the best they can do is make it the neighborhoods problems.
Both the neighborhoods and those in their cars deserve better than this, but our damn govt is too afraid to raise any taxes on business to actually provide a solution.
Worse of all is we fucking fall into this trap of homeless vs neighborhoods. Both groups should be pressuring the city to actually solve this problem.
I really wish the stranger would push for real solutions instead of promoting the neighborhoods vs homeless narrative that helps no one. The problem is the city govt and the fucking business that keep getting free rides.
Seriously the bill keeps ticking the people but they don't have to pay for a year?!?! What kind of weak ass seattle shit is that? Hey park your car here, you'll get hundreds if not thousands in fines, and you'll piss off a bunch of people, but hey you don't have to pay for a year. Really?!?!
RV parking and car parking for homeless, with social services and with sanitation. No reason we can't do this within the month.
The real solution, provide a place for people, and robust transition system, cost $$$ and anything that costs $$$ scares the shit out pf the "left" who governs because it upsets the business ruling class.
How are you going to induce homeless folks to go there, and to stay?
Because, it's going to have rules, and a lot of those rules are deal-killers for the mentally ill, substance abusers, folks with pets, people with outstanding warrants, folks with anger management issues, etc, etc.
I'd be okay with O'Brien's idea but where's the back-up for garbage and sanitation? There is a basis for this concern because piles of trash and waste are a public health concern.
@23 cool story, but citation needed.
http://mynorthwest.com/245156/expenses-s…
"there would be significant liability and insurance costs associated with a city managing something like a homeless person RV lot"
I didn't see any in the above estimate. At least not as an individual budget item.
1. Homelessness
2. RVs parking in residential neighborhoods where too many of those RVs occupants are engaged in criminality.
#1 -It doesn't seem like anyone has stepped up with any real solutions for problem #1 though I do like that O'Brien at least makes an attempt to write one in his proposal. I'd personally like to see the outreach portion of that proposal implemented, tested, and refined before the rest of it. Doing real work to get people off the streets/RVs/tents and into some stability and treatment will go a long way to improving life for all of us and it'll probably save a whole lot of money in the long run.
#2 -The cops aren't doing nearly enough about the crime in this city on a whole, let alone the property crime that's become an epidemic in a lot of the North End. Passing an ordinance that further ties their hands in dealing with the problem RVs isn't a good solution. If people weren't getting their cars rifled through on a weekly basis, they might be more compassionate to those less fortunate.
You are unpopular. The reason people like Mike O'Brien keep getting reelected by ridiculously large margins is that their approach is the one that most people want to see. Most voters know that crime everywhere in Seattle is very low, especially the north side. They know that the people you assholes want to push around from one place to another so you don't have to look at them very long need help. Most of Seattle wants to help them. Shoving them around is not help, it's just mean. The number of citizens infected by anything from a discarded drug needle remains zero so far this year. Just like last year when it was also zero, and every other year before that as long as anyone can remember. Your level of drug needle hysteria has no basis. Pro tip: They're gross. Don't touch them. Live your life.
There were some mayor candidates who shared your sad delusion that homeowners and "taxpayers" are the World's Biggest Victims. Those guys got crushed. Most news stories about them were written for comedic effect. The Times knew they could smirk at them and not offend enough subscribers to matter.
A big chunk of any renter's rent is the landlord's property taxes. A property tax hike means a rent increase. Renters pay more sales taxes than the upper classes who shop more online and more out of state. Renters don't take a tax deduction for mortgage interest. You have to make a lot of money before deducting your state sales taxes gets you anything. That's a perk for the rich.
They young and the low income and anyone who rents bears a bigger tax burden then you whining "taxpayers". Nobody dodges more taxes than you. This phony victim act is more of the same: playing the ref to try to give your privileged self even more privileges.
You're not fooling anybody in Seattle with that shit. I refer you to the fact that you candidates always get their asses handed to them.
I suggest Rich neighborhoods that are only Single Family zoned be designated Homeless Camping zones, but that those zoned for 85 ft 6+2 Multi Family be exempt.
Problem solved.
Also, all income groups, including lower income who have internet, shop online.
Also, there is no tax deduction for state sales tax on federal income taxes.
Not if they don't have a fixed address for the FedEx truck to make a delivery.
"mentally ill, substance abusers, folks with pets, people with outstanding warrants, folks with anger management issues,"
So the best way of dealing with these people are just letting them camp in neighborhoods? Really?!? Come on.
Also its stupid that there are rules preventing people with pets from going to shelters. Thats just fucking stupid. As long as the pet is well behaved they should be let in.
The only reason we can't find some sort of shelter that includes sanitation and social services is lack of $$$. The only reason we lack the $$$ is cause our leaders are cowards.
Heidi, you're being disingenuous. If you really don't think that homeless service providers and legal advocates such as Columbia, ACLU, etc., are not among the most present and vocal power centers in city hall, you need to look harder. You can't swing a cat in city hall without hitting someone like Sharon Lee or Lisa Daugaard. They are most certainly part of the machine. As are you, Erica, etc. You might as well own it because you have access to and the ear of the city's power structure (aka machine) and they appear entrenched for now.
Courtney Gregoire, a member of the Port Commission, is married to Scott LIndsay, who is running against Pete Holmes for Seattle City Attorney. Together with Christine Gregoire, Reuven Carlyle (state senator) and all the other mainstream "Democrats," they are supporting Jenny Durkan for mayor. Republicans have become fascists while Democrats have become Republicans.
Oh they have those tools alright. Bricks, crowbars, you name it. Whatever tools they need to get into SOMEONE ELSE'S permanent housing.