Update: Homeless encampment still at T-107 Park

(T-107 Park photos taken this morning by Christopher Boffoli)
Correction to a report we published about half an hour ago: The homeless encampment that calls itself Nickelsville is still at Terminal 107 Park (map) – the site from which they have finished clearing the last of their items is the 2nd SW/Highland Park Way site they started leaving last night. We’ll be checking with the Port of Seattle to see what it’s planning to do, since T-107 Park is on land owned by the port, which is reported to have sent reps last night to tell the campers they couldn’t stay. They were under orders to leave the state-owned 2nd/HP Way site by this morning.

MONDAY NOTE: Over the weekend, the Port of Seattle published its official statement, which says it expects the process of evicting the encampment to take about a week.

Mike July 24, 2009 (9:45 am)

Let’s hope that they go away and never come back.

Robert July 24, 2009 (10:00 am)

I realize WSB is doing it’s job, but I’d be one happy fellow if I never heard about the eternal homeless encampment ever again.

WSB July 24, 2009 (10:07 am)

It was out of the news – our news, anyway – for nine months till they decided to move back to West Seattle a month ago.

JanS July 24, 2009 (10:12 am)

So, Mike…where would you like to see these people go? Does that mean that if they go away forever they don’t exist anymore? I realize that their situation isn’t ideal, that maybe they need to really find someplace where they’re wanted instead of setting up camp just anywhere, but, please, if it was you, what would you be wanting in that situation. Or do we just want them to be someone else’s problem?

Serious questions all..answers?

Ms Pam July 24, 2009 (10:27 am)

There just has to be a better solution to this whole matter than choosing to force them out or just “wishing them away”. These are human beings that deserve to know where they are going to rest and eat at at the end of the day. What if this was one of YOUR family members or a friend to proud to ask for help, or YOU?

Sage July 24, 2009 (10:43 am)

I’m totally impressed by Nickelsville’s organization and their ability to jump from the territory of one public entity to the next to drag out their stay for as long as possible. City land -> state land -> port land is a stroke of genius. Unincorporated King County must be next!
.
I am, however, *appalled* at the state for evicting them from their previous location. That location seemed to provoke close to zero concern from neighbors, and garnered strong support from the elected officials of the 34th district and many other neighbors. Nobody wants to see homelessness, but a safe & organized encampment is clearly preferable to scattered isolated folks exposed to danger. And yet Ron Judd was sent out to evict them. There was a time not too long ago when Ron Judd was a progressive labor leader, head of the King County Labor Council during the WTO protests. What happened to that guy? Did he get body-snatched?

KSJ July 24, 2009 (11:27 am)

Seems to me that they just need some porta potties and potable water to make this a more permanent solution, as long as they continue to live peacefully. T-107 isn’t probably the best place as it’s a park that people use otherwise. But their prior location sounds like it didn’t hurt anyone, as long as some provisions are made to help with sanitation issues.

thejunctionhobo July 24, 2009 (12:37 pm)

You are considered a very bad bad person if you are homeless and aren’t working.

Cheryl July 24, 2009 (12:52 pm)

I find it funny how so many people would LOVE to see the homeless camp remain where it is… I wonder if they’d feel that way if it was literally in their backyard, or on their neighbors front lawn.

It’s great to be all PC and huggy-lovey about the “plight” of the homeless. But I doubt very much if y’all would want them peeing on YOUR front porch.

Just sayin’.

JimmyG July 24, 2009 (12:53 pm)

Some of the people behind Nicklesville are NOT homeless, they are attention whores who don’t realize the harm their actions have on the true homeless and in need of our community.

I encourage WSB to take on what other media outlets in this city have failed to do, which is investigate some of the organizers in this group. They aren’t homeless, they just come stay in the camp occasionally and drum up publicity.

The truly needy of this group could get services elsewhere, but they’ve been fed a bill of goods by some of the organizers.

Those of us who work with reputable groups struggling to help the homeless are sickened at the attention Nicklesville gets which takes away from legitimate groups. Nicklesville also causes the public at large to have a negative view of what can be done to assist those in need.

KLJ July 24, 2009 (2:25 pm)

I walk my dogs at T107 Park regularly and this development cracks me up.

If the Port of Seattle Police and the SPD ignore the homeless encampment the way they ignore the lewd behavior that regularly takes place at this park, then Nicklesville has found a permanent home.

What in the world are all of the “gentlemen” who frequent T107 Park (AKA “Brokeback Park”) going to do now? Maybe they’ll all go back back to Westcrest Park.

Sage July 24, 2009 (2:33 pm)

@Cheryl – Though it’s amazing that you enough to snicker at how you know we’re all a bunch of hypocrites, I would point out that neither the former site nor the new site are really all that close to any significant # of homes. And allowing homeless people a safe place to go is both compassionate and keeps people from places which are less safe, such as, apparently, your front porch. Shutting Nickelsville doesn’t reduce the # of homeless people menacing your sense of propriety after all.
.
PS> I think that was a neighboring dog or cat that peed on your porch, not a homeless person.

Jiggers July 24, 2009 (3:26 pm)

What lewd behavior KLJ?

Pete July 24, 2009 (3:37 pm)

Until we as a society are willing to really look at the underlying causes of homelessness and deal with them we are going to have tent cities and “Nicklesvilles” in our world. I think that having organized tent cities is a far better environment than living in the “jungle” by I-5 or in the West Duwamish greenbelt. So what if some of the folks that are there get a little publicity? Is the problem of homelessness going to go away if WSB, the Seattle Times or any other news outlet does not do a story on it? I think not. That would be like saying that if the West Seattle and White Center food banks quit talking about hunger issues then we would not have to deal with hungry folks in our community. Thees are real issues and need real solutions. IN the meantime let’s give then a break and a safe place to sleep and eat their meals while the majority of them try and get their lives back on track.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Remember that there are many in our community that are one pay check away from looking for a tent city. But for the grace of God there I am.

Mike July 24, 2009 (4:15 pm)

For all of you on here that support Nickelsville, I suggest you give us your address so that we can send them your way. Its easy to say that you support it when its not in your neighborhood!

WSM July 24, 2009 (5:12 pm)

Maybe they could camp at the “Hole Foods” site?

p2 July 24, 2009 (5:54 pm)

jiggers, klj refers to the fact that T107 is a cruise spot, used by men for anonymous ‘encounters’ under cover of the park’s shrubbery. it’s also a nice place to walk your dog, which i often do. the men never bother me, we manage to avoid eachother. that park isn’t very large, though. hard to imagine there being enough room for all the dog walking, lunch-time picnics, amorous activity, and a big homeless camp …

JanS July 24, 2009 (6:12 pm)

Mike…I live in the Admiral District not far from Hiawatha Park. I know of at least one man who sleeps there regularly, on a park bench…no tent, at all. Just because they’re not quite as visible doesn’t mean they don’t exist. They ARE in my backyard, they ARE in your back yard…and I have a feeling that they’re a helluva lot more quiet and civilized than the teenagers who decide to camp out on their car hoods in the Safeway parking lot at 1:30am, dancing, laughing and playing music. Now *there* are some people that I just wish would go away and play in their own backyard.

Seph July 27, 2009 (2:52 pm)

Up until Friday, I have been walking, daily, a loop from my home in the 3800 blk of 17th Ave SW to the south end of the T-107 Park. I avoided that loop this weekend hoping that the Port would take the appropriate action and remove the trespassers. NO, the Port allowed the “Nickelsville residents (who) have now occupied Terminal 107 without notice or permission, and are camping illegally on public property” to remain over the weekend, and now report that they are “in ‘Eviction Court’ with Nickelsville”.

This is public property. What eviction court has jurisdiction over a park? And why does this take a week? I understand that the delivery of port-o-potties is an attempt to protect the sensitive environment from human waste products, but by allowing the occupation in the first place, the Port is failing its responsibilities on many levels. The request to use the park was the signal that once evicted from the 2nd Ave/Highland Park Way (potential jail site) campers would move to the T-107 site. The Port should have anticipated this and been prepared to defend the park from the harm being done to it as we chat.

T-107 is one of my neighborhood parks and the gated T-105 Park has been locked since Friday with a “Closed for Maintenance” sign on the gate. Supporting this illegal behavior with amenities that are not there for the law abiding citizens when the parks are not being invaded is a slap in the face to the law abiding, tax paying citizens.

Public property would have been better protected if this homeless encampment was supported with the port-o-potties and potable water at the 2nd Ave/HPW site while our elected officials put their heads together to find a solution to this ongoing problem.

Sorry, comment time is over.