We're Getting a Regional Homelessness Authority: Here Are the Details and Potential Problems

Comments

1

They won’t solve anything until they acknowledge what’s happened in the past 10 years in Seattle is not a housing crisis but mainly a junkie invasion crisis amplified by policies that only exacerbate poor life choices.

But hey, here's to more bums setting up shop in King County during your next "Ten Year War on Homelessness"

2

“Instead of building more houses, for instance, in 2017 local officials...”

In August 2016, Seattle’s voters taxed ourselves to build $290M in affordable housing in the city, so why should officials do anything before those houses could even be built?

Also, as @1 notes, drug addicts can not afford housing at any price, for obvious reasons. How many more dirty needles must we remove from Seattle’s playgrounds and parks before The Stranger notices this?

3

Turns out when you don't enforce camping laws on public land, guess what you get?

More campers!

Turns out when you don't enforce heroin possession laws, guess what you get?

More junkies!

Turns out when you don't enforce parking laws for RVs, guess what you get?

More junkies in RVs!

Turns out when you give away needles for free (with no actual "exchange"), guess what you get?

More blood soaked needles in parks!

Turns out when you don't enforce laws on shitting in public, guess what you get?

More shit!

It's almost like these people never raised a toddler.

4

Aside from Reagan Dunn are the meatheads going to have any representation on this board? The meatheads demand representation!

5

@4

By "meatheads" do you mean adults who understand human behavior, and realize that when you make life cushy for bums all you are going to get is more of them?

6

The problem isn't homeless people, the problem is reptilians.

These disgusting animals, with their poisonous narcotic blood and their natural camouflage that makes them appear human to the weak of mind, are increasingly nesting in our cities as natural habitat disappears.

We will not solve the problem until we outfit law enforcement with special equipment that defeats the camouflage of the lizard people. We must cull them from cities before they begin to steal our children.

In the meantime, steel yourselves, fellow citizens. Retrain your minds. Make your thoughts ever stronger, until you too can see the scales on these filthy creatures in our midst.

7

Wonder who's paying for the trolls?

9

@8 Yep, poor Dow sat in the park every day, and starting throwing seed out for the pigeons. Then one day he stopped and wondered why there were so many pigeons and why were they shitting all over his car. He decided the solution was even more bird seed.

10

@7 our long-time resident trollshitter? Afraid he does it for free.

11

It's about damn time that the "smaller cities" who are worried about getting screwed here start pulling their weight on this. Where are the shelters in Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, Enumclaw? Why should homeless people HAVE to come to Seattle to access services? This is a county-wide problem (actually, statewide) and its ridiculous that one or two large cities are expected to pick up everyone else's slack. To the extent that providing more services in Seattle leads more people to come into the city to access said services, there's no way we can ever solve the problem.

12

@10 I prefer “person experiencing trollshitting”

But yeah, trolling = reality

13

Could somebody tell Sybil to shut her mouths already?

14

Sounds like they've decided to take our failed City policies County wide.

15

@13 Que?

16

Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, and Enumclaw can build all the shelters they want. If they still insist on drug and public camping enforcement, no one's coming to town.

17

@16- Let's do the experiment. The street junkies that everyone is complaining about are the most visible and annoying art of the homeless population, but I doubt they are the majority. Time to have services for the rest of the homeless distributed around the metro area/county. I suspect that would slow the influx of people with nowhere to go (i.e. the campers) into the city. What do we have to lose?

18

@17 Aggressively go after public camping infractions and I'm with you.

19

Oooooh... an Authority!
How exciting!!

Will there be committees?
Hearings?
Reports?

We can hardly wait...

20

"but I doubt they are the majority"

King County’s own lawsuit against Purdue Pharma admits that “the majority of the homeless population is addicted to or uses opioids”. That's in a court submission, so liable to perjury laws. And that's just opioids, not meth or booze.

Seattle and King County currently spend nearly $460 million a year on addiction and mental-health services, plus another $119 million a year on medical services specifically for the homeless—more than enough money to provide basic services for all the homeless who want them.

But the homeless industrial complex argues that the street homeless want help but that there aren’t enough services. Once again, King County's data contradict their claims: 63 percent of the street homeless refuse shelter when offered it by the city’s Navigation Teams, claiming that “there are too many rules” (39.5 percent) or that “they are too crowded” (32.6 percent).

The problem ain't money or housing. It's the compassion brigades and their willingness to ignore reality for their ideology.

21

"Once again, King County's data contradict their claims: 63 percent of the street homeless refuse shelter when offered it by the city’s Navigation Teams, claiming that “there are too many rules” (39.5 percent) or that “they are too crowded” (32.6 percent)."

That's really interesting. Where'd you get those numbers from? I'd be interested in reading the report.

23

@21 Seattle Times investigation piece found only 39% of people contacted accepted help, numbers from the city.

"The [City of Seattle navigation] team recently gave The Seattle Times its database detailing contacts with people in unsanctioned homeless camps, but the data was impossible to analyze. The records lacked many data fields and had inconsistent explanations of what offers of shelter were accepted. At the Times’ request, the team provided a refined data set that showed how many people had accepted “alternative living arrangements,” which can include shelters, motels or living with relatives.The team said those people were 39 percent of all the people they had contact with."

No data provided on how many of those who accepted help, returned to camping because the being Seattle and King County all data that shows the "housing crisis" narrative to be bullshit is buried.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/before-the-tent-camps-are-cleared-this-seattle-team-coaxes-the-homeless-toward-shelter/

24

Tent city has been at 2 churches in Kirkland that I know of. They have rules though. You cant use drugs and if you don't make it back before curfew too bad.

25

I like to call this the No Homeless Services in Wealthy Neighborhoods council.

Because that's what they'll do.

Sweep it under the rug and pretend it will go away.

26

@20 @23 How is it that the explosion in the homeless population in this city synced almost perfectly with the explosion in housing costs, if drug addiction is behind it? What's more likely: rising housing costs are turning people into junkies or your take on the issue is simply inane?

27

" rising housing costs are turning people into junkies"

Thanks for the laugh. Please let us know at what price point an unemployed junkie with a $2000 a month habit, living under I5 can sign an affordable studio lease.

28

There are tons of wealthy humans who are addicted to booze and pills, and have been for ages, who aren't about to lose their white-collar boss-type jobs, nor leave their homes to go live in a sidewalk tent.

The problem is reptilians, not booze or drugs.

29

@28 So the lesson is, learn to be a functioning drunk.

30

@29 Or stay in your mommy's basement forever rent free, like our perpetually adolescent, resident professional troll!

31

@26: You might want to educate yourself on the difference between “correlation” and “causation.”

After that, you could continue with the url provided @23. Your new-found acquaintance with some actual facts might help calm your temper sufficiently to help you not lash out at your fellow commenters for the crime of citing said facts.

32

@30 How d'ya guess?

33

@31 That article backs up the claim that drug addiction is behind the huge increase in the homeless population? Let's see: the cities with the most dire problems with homelessness seem to pretty much across the board be the same cities that have seen the most drastic increase in housing costs over the last decade. Pretty strong correlation. What 'actual facts' are there that suggest the cause lies elsewhere?

34

@33 Those are also cities that have decriminalized heroin sale and possession, hand out free needles like candy and have more homeless services per capita than 95% of American cities.

I'd say that's what's bring the flies in, the steaming pile of bullshit Seattle, LA, Portland and San Fran have put out.

Junkies and tweakers can't rent a studio at any price point when they are unemployed with a $2000 a monthly habit.

35

@33: In 2016, Seattle’s survey of our homeless population elicited the following responses:

“When asked what caused their homelessness, 25 percent said a lost job, 13 percent said alcohol or drug use, and 11 percent said they couldn't afford a rent increase. Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they use alcohol, 35 percent said they use hard drugs like meth, heroin, and crack, 42 percent said they have depression, and 31 percent said they have post-traumatic stress disorder."

So, the homeless themselves said "rent increase" was the LEAST common reason for their condition, while alcohol and harder drug use was a more common reason. Given this was totally self-reported data, with no independent verification attempts of any kind, both the rates and consequential home losses due to drug/alcohol should be treated as absolute minimums.

From the city's homeless survey of 2016, reported by The Stranger (https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/03/03/24967599/new-survey-finds-most-people-experiencing-homelessness-in-seattle-were-already-here-when-they-became-homeless)

36

@35 Yeah that basically tells us exactly nothing. Let's see 'lost a job'. Did they have housing when they had a job? How did losing a job result in them being homeless if they did not lose their housing after they lost their job? 'Rent increase' is not the only reason people lose housing. There is an extremely strong correlation between the explosion in housing costs and the explosion of the homeless population, and there isn't any other real convincing explanation for it.

37

@36: Your belligerent denial is not merely expected, but deeply humorous. Let’s try again: “...11 percent said they couldn't afford a rent increase.”

That’s 1 of 9 homeless persons confirming your silly “rent increases create junkies” hypothesis. (All self-reported, no checking.) Meanwhile, “Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they use alcohol, 35 percent said they use hard drugs like meth, heroin, and crack,” Because persons with those habits are likely to stay stably housed, right?

Take another swing, and we’ll start quoting from the survey itself. (That will really get ugly for you.)

38

@36 Er, people did not become homeless because of substance abuse issues before the situation reached the crisis level it is at today? Has there been a dramatic increase in substance abusers? Perhaps...in say West Virginia. The question is not what led people to become homeless, the question is why are there so many more today than there were 10 years ago. And the answer is, pretty clearly, the ballooning cost of housing, unless of course demonizing the downtrodden is your agenda.

39

@38: "Er, people did not become homeless because of substance abuse issues before the situation reached the crisis level it is at today? Has there been a dramatic increase in substance abusers? Perhaps...in say West Virginia."

Nice combination of ignorance and bigotry you're sporting there. Had you paid attention up-thread, you would have noticed mention of this lawsuit, by King County against Purdue Pharma:

"349. Although the causes of homelessness are multi-faceted and complex, substance abuse is both a contributing cause and result of homelessness. The dramatic rise in homelessness in King County is due in part to the opioid epidemic. Some estimates suggest that the majority of the homeless population is addicted to or uses opioids.

"350. Prescription opioids have not only helped to fuel the homeless crisis, but have also made it immeasurably more difficult for the County to address. Mental health services, for example, are critical for many in the homeless population. Unfortunately, opioid use and addiction can make it more difficult to provide effective mental health treatment. Those who need help most often turn to opioids—legal or not—to self-medicate and avoid getting treatment and care that might lead to long-term success and more positive outcomes. Whether opioid addiction caused these people to lose their homes or not, opioid addictions now prevent countless numbers of people from finding a way out of homelessness.

"351. Additionally, while the leading cause of death among homeless Americans used to be HIV, it is now drug overdose."

(https://www.krcomplexlit.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/King-County-Complaint-1-010518-1.pdf)

"The question is not what led people to become homeless,"

That's exactly the question which you've insisted has one and only one answer.

"...the question is why are there so many more today than there were 10 years ago."

Because they have been moving here, just as housed persons have. That is why housing costs and homelessness have been rising apace; one did not cause the other. Your mention of West Virginia was a nice touch:

'Burns told KIRO 7 she's a former children's social worker who moved to Seattle from West Virginia. "We appreciate Seattle's liberal vibe," she said.'

(https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/seattle-homeless-tent-mansion-low-priority-for-city-cleanup/727621918)

The City's 2016 Survey of homeless persons found most of them were not from Seattle. When asked, a minority said they were living in Seattle when they most recently became homeless. Therefore, most arrived in Seattle already homeless, like Burns. Rising housing costs can't be the answer when the person wasn't paying any housing costs before arrival.

(https://humaninterests.seattle.gov/2017/03/03/city-of-seattle-2016-homeless-needs-assessment/)

Thanks for playing! Sorry about your outcome. Better luck next time.