Someone needs to ask Sattler how she plans to prevent people from leaving the shelters and returning to the streets if they find the refugee-camp lifestyle doesn't suit them.


@1 What, the pillows might not be fluffy enough?

Glad you can now acknowledge it's not a housing problem..


@2 Answer the question, Feebles. Take Ken's lead here-- he's at least being honest.

And Ken @3: after due process of course, right? On charges of... well, what, exactly?


" On charges of... well, what, exactly?"

Outstanding warrants, B&E, failure to appear in court, failure to attend court sanction treatment, bicycle theft, heroin possession, assault, public intoxication, unregistered/uninsured RVs, public defecation.

The list, I'm sure, is longer than my arm.

Trust me, you roust them every day from their tents and enforce the law, they'll take their junkie asses elsewhere looking for suckers. Maybe there's a couch at your place.

Then we'll be left with the few lonesome hobos every town has, instead of the junkie zombies who have moved here.


Agreed, we should jail the far right extremists who don't care about Americans.

... oh, you didn't mean yourselves, while you continue to consume your "legal" drugs like hard alcohol spirits and addictive cigars ...


Putting 1000-2000 people in a Sam's Club may not seem humane but our current Tent Cities do not meet basic UN Refugee camp standards, to say nothing of the unsanctioned encampments allowed throughout the city. At least this proposal is talking about the scale needed. At this time we need housing for 3-5000 destitute people. No one else has a plan for that.


@6 Even if every single person you stuff into the shelter had one of those outstanding warrents, I can't imagine bail being set at more than a couple hundred bucks, or eventual sentences extending more than a few months, for petty theft, possession, trespassing, contempt of court, vehicle paperwork violations, or, um, pooping.

These are all low-level, misdemeanor crimes. Judges aren't going to send anyone up for years on charges like that.

Then when they've served their time, you bus them back to the shelter, they decide they don't like it, and leave to live on the streets instead-- now without outstanding warrants.

What's your plan at that point, Feebs?


@4 If the war on crime was so unsuccessful, how come crime is at its lowest in decades?


" Judges aren't going to send anyone up for years on charges like that."

Hey, take away the welcome mat you rolled out and make it a pain in the ass to be a non-functioning, low-rent criminal member of society, and they will leave. The broken windows theory works.


@8 If it isn't humane, then people aren't likely to stay in the shelters, are they?

Unless you've got some plan for keeping them from leaving? Nobody in favor of Sattler's proposal seems to have worked out this part of it yet. Or even thought about it much.


@11 Having a uniform code of justice means we apply the same penalties to your kids in college or other revelers who get caught stealing traffic cones or breaking into the pool at night or peeing on a public statue or snorting a little coke in the club bathroom or having a taillight out.

Sorry, Feebles, it doesn't matter how much it pisses you off.

No judge is going to send anyone up for years on that kind of charge.


Its an idea, the devil is in the details. How much would it cost to construct studio apartments or lockable rooms with common areas? Have some services on site. Health clinic, AA meetings, career center, whatever shit people need to get back on their feet?


"Or even thought about it much."

How's the hug-a-bum crowd's plan working out?


I don't shop at Walmart (Sam's) on principle but I don't think it looks anything like the picture.
In winter a covered, dry heated space in a warehouse is not a lot better than freezing outside?
Bathrooms, showers OMFG, trash pickup, the inhumanity?
Maybe not 1000's of people per location, there are lots of empty buildings with some installed partitions that would work.

What about my rights?

No let's just wait until more of those low rent $400K, no maintenance, free utilities condos are available. No strings attached, this is what I deserve!

In the mean time, I'll just camp out surrounded by fifth on the side of I90 or in a derelict flammable RV in SODO.

Stickin' it to the man!


"No let's just wait until more of those low rent $400K, no maintenance, free utilities condos are available. No strings attached"

Until my house has a Queen Anne view of downtown, or the Olympics, consider me homeless.


Apparently in Seattle, beggars can be choosers.


@other-14 through 17

Jesus, Feebs, are you really reduced to just crapflooding now?

You do realize there's only a couple dozen SLOG commenters left these days, and they all caught on to your anonymous-posting trick years ago?


No, @18, they think we don't know how to use our brains, and are suckers for this.


@19 Except I'm not 15, and I'm more than happy to shop at Walmart, if only to see "people of walmart".

Your definition of anonymous is a good laugh though, robotslave


The miserable failure of our past policies means citizens may actually take a serious look at Sattler’s idea. Why not? It can’t fail worse than we already have.

Our ten-year plan to end homelessness collapsed into a homelessness crisis. While consecutive mayors have since pursued reform, our City Council decided the only way forward was to tax our jobs, and throw our employers’ money away on the same homeless-industrial complex which had already delivered nothing but expensive failure. We citizens revolted and got the EHT repealed.

So, voters in District 5 have a choice: an incumbent with a failed plan, or a challenger with a new plan. I would not want to be the incumbent in that scenario — especially if I’d recently obtained less than 50% of the primary vote.


@20 More crap doesn't turn your crapflood into an answer to my question, Feebles.

@21 Wake up, tensor, you're dreaming. The dead narrative you've just repeated, again, has been decomposing since the primary. The voters in District 5, or anywhere else, aren't going to wake up one morning and suddenly recognize the Reptilians lurking in the streets, no matter how hard you try to teach everyone to recognize the scent of their poisonous narcotic blood.


Somehow, it's hard to see Sattler cruising to victory on this brilliant idea.


@22: Stating your opinion as if it was a fact does not make it one.

Repeatedly stating an opinion you repeatedly fail to support does not make your opinion factually-based.

Repeatedly bashing your straw man does not equate to ever winning an argument with another human being.

You’re welcome.

(You’re also free to explain how Sattler’s plan is worse than what the incumbent has done, but no one is waiting up for you, if you know what I mean...)


@16 you are definitely being repressed.

@18 no that's only me not related to 14,16,17.

There are a lot of fairly lefty folks not buying doubling down on the status quo. Sattler's idea is worth talking about. It's never as cheap to do these things as it seems, but using existing structures to provide shelter (like Mary's house) is not inhumane like it is being portrayed. It's better than McNeil Island which was the option presented on that TV show.


She sounds pretty smart to me. And it sounds like a pretty good damn idea if you ask me.


Literally warehousing them sounds dystopian compared to some of the small house proposals I've seen, but it's better than in the city park nearby, devaluing my home. All you can screw. I want housing prices to go way the fuck up.


@24 Yes, tensor, hold onto that, it's the first sign of progress we've seen so far.

You have come very close to admitting this to yourself: that repeating your dead narrative, over and over and over again, will not bring it back to life. It has been a corpse since the primary.

Try to remember this, the next time you feel the urge claim that Hobo Loathing will Drive The Commies From the City Council.


@28: While you’re at it, you can also not actually quote me calling any humans “Reptilians,” although you just dishonestly insinuated I’ve done exactly that.

As you can’t ever actually quote me making any of the statements you keep attributing to me, why not just argue policy, instead of just making groundless personal attacks? Sure, you’ll lose, and lose badly, inadvertently making the case for removal of our remaining Council incumbents, but at least you’ll lose honorably.


@29 I know the recovery process can be painful, tensor, and when you're in pain it can be hard to distinguish what's real from what isn't.

Metaphors aren't real. Your virulent dehumanization of the homeless does not mean you really truly literally actually see them as Reptilians. The metaphor is only there to throw your characterizations into sharp relief, to hopefully give you a sense, however briefly, of what your own attitudes look like to others, to people who aren't plagued with the fear and the strange, almost autistic rage that consume you.


@30: “The metaphor is only there to throw your characterizations into sharp relief,”

Really? Which characterizations might those be? You have yet to give a single example, and yet you’re now claiming multiple ones exist. Quote them. (In full. With urls.)

Look, we can all see how reality can be an excruciatingly painful place for you, what with all the sharp corners and elbows and whatnot, but retreating into a fantasy and lashing out from inside it really helps no one, yourself least of all. Counseling is available. (Why, you can ask Dan Savage without even leaving Slog!)


Hey Lester, why don't you look up the recommendation the King County Board of Health proposed in October 2018 that was essentially the same recommendation? Why don't you mention San Diego County, who stood up a FEMA-style emergency response to a Hepatitis A epidemic, and check into the reality that this response made all the difference to the people of that county? The same large tent, donated by a private firm, is being used now as an enhanced shelter for with room for pets, partners and possessions. Social workers, job counsellors, and behavioral support is housed there and their success "flow through" rate is over 30%. How about other cities using this large enhanced shelter method, such as San Francisco, Portland, and Toronto? Want to piss on those cities indiscriminately with no hint of actual news reporting? Would you rather people freeze and die? Would you rather we pollute Puget Sound from untreated human waste? Would you rather women in unsanctioned encampments be brutalized and prostituted? Would you rather HIV and HCV epidemics spread? You write like a paid campaign staffer for the Juarez campaign.


Ann is suggesting this as a temporary solution and a bridge to get people needs assessments and then into permanent supportive housing. We are approaching a winter and cannot continue to leave people outside in tents, it's not fair and it's not right. It's not what I would want for my friends and family. I would want them in a temporary emergency shelter like the ones Ann is proposing.


Ann Sattler has experience working in a refugee camp, and she points out that conditions there were much better and humane than what we see in our homeless encampments here. What I see on the streets is anything BUT humane, and I want better for people who are in crisis. We are well beyond the days of handing out a sandwich and a blanket. People need mental health care. People need drug rehab. People need medical care. What they do NOT need is to keep wasting away on our rainy sidewalks for another winter while we all attack each other on the Internet about what "compassion" looks like. YES, we need a mass disaster response to this because it IS a humanitarian crisis. Ann's idea for shelters is the first step in helping people off the street. Next comes services, SRO accommodations, and eventually permanent housing. It's time for Tired Deb to step aside and let an adult with experience in humanitarian crisis response take over.


What a strange response to a candidate who is listening to national best practice recommendations and trying to save lives and prevent suffering and disease. What does it even mean to be "progressive" in Seattle anymore if providing shelter to scale during a homelessness crisis and protecting public spaces from further environmental degradation are treated with such scathing "news" coverage?

Good for Ann Davison Sattler. Hope D5 voters realize they have a great choice with fresh energy and commitment to actually make progress in our local political quagmire.


This sounds like a much better plan than the current strategy, which degrades the environment and the community, while allowing people to sink further into despair. Good for Ann!


I know that extreme hyperbole and just plain lies are as core to the Stranger as weed ads, but implying that homeless people will be locked up in warehouses against their will is pretty damn offensive. Homeless folks would be offered the choice to go to a shelter voluntarily or they can move on. This is literally the solution endorsed by extremists such as Colleen Echohawk and CM Mosqueda. I’m actual kindof annoyed at how unimaginative this is...if I could just write made up lies about people, I’d be accusing them of black masses and being Satanic serial killers.


Of course The Stranger objects to Ann Sattler and her plan. That's because they WANT people living squalid illegal camps in our parks and greenbelts. The Stranger likes the in-your-face filth and crime. They don't care about the rest of us who'd like to be able use the parks we all pay for without fear of needles, human waste, and unpredictable tweakers screaming at the sky.

And, they can't stand that someone is running for council who doesn't parrot all the woke social justice talking points for a change. Sattler's plan will obviously need to be worked out in greater detail if she wins, but at least someone's finally GOT a plan. We want these people to be sheltered, don't we? And it's a plan like what the federal government uses in emergencies. I thought this was declared an emergency? With the current council member and the rest of them it's just going to be more of the same.

Finally, I find it rich that the head of DESC is criticizing her plan based on sanitation and living conditions. He should pay attention to what's going on is in his own house.


Regardless of your politics, we voters have two choices. One is an incumbent who doesn't go to work very often. She didn't show up at the rent control city council committee meeting even though she's vice-chair of the committee. She skipped the public input and debate portions of the Pronto bike share program acquisition by the City, and just showed up for the vote, but said nothing when the vote was mis-tallied. She has missed or been late to 43% of the last 100 required meetings. At the last debate, she said she was tired and very busy. The challenger, on the other hand, worked in a UN refugee camp for Cambodian refugees in Thailand, cleaned up (herself, hands-on, with a community group) a homeless encampment in D5 (under 15th Ave, at Thornton Creek) and got to know the residents there, and consistently shows up to speak with anyone in her district who contacts her and wants to talk. She broke her foot during the campaign, but continued to go door-to-door to get to know the voters and listen to their concerns.

This is not a part-time job. If you want to give feedback on her homeless plan, she'll listen to you. Most importantly, she'll treat this as the full-time job that it is. The alternative (the incumbent), regardless of policy positions or points of view, can't do the job because she doesn't have the energy and often doesn't even show up for work.


'This Seattle Council's' name is Ann Davison-Sattler and unlike Debora Juarez, she works for the people. The people of District 5 that have constantly begged for help from Ms. Juarez yet received nothing. No visits to the homeless camps in our neighborhood, not even an email response and she lives in D5 for pete's sake. Ann actually came by to our house and took the time to LISTEN and I know she's helped other D5 residents too that are directly affected by the homeless camps by bringing in the news people to give the residents a voice. We need to stop sugar coating the homelessness issue in our city, it is a state of emergency, it is not an "every city problem", and it is harming Seattleites AND the homeless people themselves. Please take the time to watch this video, this is our incumbent, she's rude, she doesn't listen to her constituents, and we need to vote her out.


@1, @4, @9, @12, @13:

You do understand that “...round up any remaining homeless people and force them to live in abandoned warehouses” is Lester’s complete fabrication, correct? Because you just kept banging on (and on, and on...) exactly as if Sattler’s plan actually would require anyone to enter or to stay in any of her three proposed facilities.

Under her plan, anyone could choose to enter or leave the facilities. Due to enforcement of anti-vagrancy laws, they would not have any unsanctioned encampments to return to if they left the facilities. As no one is forced to live in Seattle, the option to leave town would remain.

(What’s it called when a contrary-to-fact tale is presented as if it was real? “Unreliable narrator”? “False narration”? Help me out here, would you?)


Lester Black admits to being sober, sometimes. His journalism reflects his state of consciousness: a disordered flight of ideas with omissions of fact and commissions of fabricated lies. Its no wonder that The Stranger continues to get physically thinner every year - both in paid advertisers and relevant content. Go back to sleep, Stranger. You're drunk, Lester.

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

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