City list of potential homeless-camp sites includes 2 in West Seattle

Dunno October 26, 2010 (5:38 pm)

How about a site closer to services. I’m thinking the empty space just south of the High Point medical/dental building on east side of 35th. Closer to the food bank, library, medical, dental, and activities for any younger children. Not against the other two, but the Delridge location is fairly isolated.
Also wondering about the empty building at 35th and Avalon. Could city get this at good price for more low income housing? I know it’s a Mastro property most likely in litigation, what a waste.

WSB October 26, 2010 (6:10 pm)

Dunno – Actually the 35th/Avalon site was sold a few months back and the new owner insists they’ll be putting millions into it to finish it. It’s posted again for leasing of the future retail spaces. I’m overdue for a followup. – TR

CarolPB October 26, 2010 (6:25 pm)

Great response, Dunno. I can just imagine all the NIMBY cries from Magnolia!

dell October 26, 2010 (6:48 pm)

Has anyone actually checked out the Delridge site recently? We pass it regularly on the way to school: the place turns into a mucky swamp for most of the fall/winter.

DW October 26, 2010 (7:48 pm)

I’m really opposed to this. I think the focus needs to be on job training and other programs that lift people out of homelessness rather than throwing up a bunch of tents. Sometimes I feel like the whole focus of the social service community is simply getting a roof — any roof — over people’s heads. What happens after that tends to end up as an afterthought.

And selfishly, I don’t like the thought of this near my kids. Call me a NIMBY if you want, but it’s not the kind of thing I want in my neighborhood.

GRG October 26, 2010 (8:00 pm)

Amen DW — this is the last thing we need in West Seattle — no way! We need to organize to stop this before it gets any headway at all! Great for already falling property values as well as increasing crime and litter too. Thanks a lot Mayor McSchwinn

Mack October 26, 2010 (8:04 pm)

Fill in the Whole Food Hole and put the homeless camp there. It was supposed to be a multifamily project anyway.

JanS October 26, 2010 (8:17 pm)

DW…and where do you suggest they live while they’re training for non-existent jobs? Better a tent in a community, than a cardboard box under a bridge. Who said they couldn’t do both?

WSnewbie October 26, 2010 (8:53 pm)

This is such a bad idea.

proudpugetridger October 26, 2010 (8:54 pm)

Oh great, here we go again…! Last time they squatted down on the Port of Seattle’s property it took months to run ’em out.
Hey, I have an idea: Let’s put them in Lincoln Park or Hamilton Viewpoint!

PT October 26, 2010 (8:56 pm)

There are too many children in the immediate vicinity of the 35th Avenue & Edmunds location to make that a good choice. The Mount Saint Vincent across the street houses both elderly residents and a childcare facility – two vulnerable populations.
I’m not saying that all homeless people are dangerous – just that a permanent encampment will undoubtedly bring some amount of mental illness, drugs/alcohol, and crime to a neighborhood of children and elderly residents. NOT a good match for the 35th & Edmunds locale.

Kevin October 26, 2010 (8:58 pm)

You want a homeless “village” on 35th ave?!?!?!? Or 1 block away from a school?!?!? Its all fun and progressive until someones house/car/piece of mind gets broken or stolen. These areas shouldnt even be options. They dont care if they are near medical/dental facilities, or do they need a library. We are giving them a place to sleep so the library is of no need. And if there are small chldren living in this camps, Im sure CPS would have something to say about that. Get a grip on reality. These are not free loving peacefull down on their luck individuals. They have come to grips with the fact the dont wont to work or do anything productive other then cry for more more more more. If I offendeded anyone. Go invite into your own home or better yet open your backyard to the village and tell me how happy you are in a month. I would gladly exchange information.

ttt October 26, 2010 (9:03 pm)

I agree with DW. Seems like near Mayor McGinn’s home would be a perfect place. The article did say a PERMANENT homeless encampment. How about permanent housing for the homeless in a building instead of a tent city? Is this really helping the homeless get out of the status of being homeless?

Been There October 26, 2010 (9:25 pm)

As dell states above, the 5601 23rd Ave site has standing water in it or is moist most months of the year. It is a low lying area at the base of Puget Ridge so a lot of water congregates there. It is an isolated site in an already struggling neighborhood which is not good for anyone.

proudpugetridger October 26, 2010 (9:28 pm)

Kevin is spot-on, showing great insight. I remember the last time we went through this it was completely exasperating. So many people were offended by the suggestion that a level-3 sex offender can so easily hide within the encampment. Sure enough, the Ballard community had exactly that situation with those encampment dwellers. Don’t expect the lower income communities will roll over and allow this without a fight!

B October 26, 2010 (9:40 pm)

So they are saying there would be a homeless camp on I-35? With Children there? Are you kidding me? One kid waking up in the middle of the night to go pee will walk out onto 35th and get hit by a car. How safe is that?

JM October 26, 2010 (10:01 pm)

Since when did homeless people such a feared neighbor. These are not the street alcoholic sleeping in doorways. These people are trying their best, they are just down on their luck. All of the tent cities have rules of conduct and non-profit support. They are not free-for-all.

Most of the tent city people have some sort of job. They just can’t make rent or are waiting for housing. A West Seattle location is really needed as we are 1/5 of Seattle. Toilet, Shower, Kitchen? It that too much to ask?

With the way the economy there might be more folks like this. Who knows, if some of us blog reading and commenting people jobs lost our jobs, and / or had a medical disaster, we might need a place to pitch our tents for a while.

Josh October 26, 2010 (10:06 pm)

Vacant school buildings across Seattle with real roofs, heat, toilets and water include:
(from Seattle Schools Website)
Closed sites held vacant for use as interim or emergency sites (3): Boren, McDonald, Magnolia
Closed sites currently vacant (2): Fairmount Park, Genesee Hill
Closed sites declared surplus and designated for long-term lease or sale (1): Martin Luther King
Got to be better than tents, port-a-potties and garbage strewn across a soggy field.

NotMe October 26, 2010 (10:35 pm)

Why are you bringing your children into this? What do they have to do with the homeless? Are you suggesting your children are the reason to keep “them” away?
.
I think I like this thinking! This is brilliant! We can use “children” as the solution to ALL our problems… don’t you see?
.
We can get this “hole” filled in. (We don’t want our children to fall into the hole.)
.
Let’s start with the “hole” first and see how that goes. I think if that works out, we can tackle what makes a homeless person, what makes them not want to get jobs, where they should go, and hell – we can go over and solve the issues in the Middle East.
.
It’s amazing what comes out in the comment section.

marty October 26, 2010 (10:44 pm)

We already have one on Harbor avenue. Currently five motor homes with permanent residents. Parking enforcement won’t do anything as long as they move every 72 hours. The Health Department choses to ignore it even though they have no sewer provisions. So we already have a homeless camp, it even comes with a great view!!

dsa October 26, 2010 (10:59 pm)

Build it and they will come. I was talking to some homeless people in Orlando who told me how hospitable Seattle is. There is a homeless grapevine of information.

Dora October 26, 2010 (11:19 pm)

Maybe they should remove the “walking on logs” art and put then right on the entrance to West Seattle, that would be a great “hello” to West Seattle. Property values would raise so fast! Maybe all of those in support of a tent city in West Seattle should just adopt a homeless family and bring then into their home. I for one don’t want a homeless tent city anywhere near West Seattle or my home. Yet another train wreck idea from our leaders of the City of Seattle.

JL October 26, 2010 (11:28 pm)

Wow! Mayor McNutt has really outdone himself this time. Let’s let all the homeless sleep in the parks, for free. How great will that be to go on a morning walk and find your local, city green space turned into a campground for those who choose not to participate in society.
On a tangent, I thought bike riding and vigorous exercise were supposed to increase brain function. Given the physique of our Mayor, either he’s lying about that whole cycling thing or he needs to pick up the pace because his ideas lately show about as much brain function as a halloween pumpkin.
City Council, please take action, this is more proof from the executive that there is such thing as a bad idea.

george October 26, 2010 (11:49 pm)

Roll call! Mayor McSchwinn? Lets take a look:

First, lets hike car tabs $20 to make up shortfalls so we can START NEW PROGRAMS aimed at pedestrians and cyclists in a troubled economy.
Then, lets CUT IN HALF the operating hours of the Alki Community Center. And keep reducing the operating hours of the city libraries.
Now, let’s set up a homeless encampment next to a major aterial in the heart of a vulnerable community.
Sir, are you losing your politcal compass? You’ve had quite a week!

Leroniusmonkfish October 27, 2010 (12:09 am)

How about Boeings Plant 2? It’s been recently vacated.

Michael October 27, 2010 (2:14 am)

Well, I live kind of right in between those two sites and tonight a homeless lady tried to sneak into my garage to urinate, so maybe the Mayor’s just trying to put the campers together with kindred spirits.

Seriously, has anyone looked at this “panel”? No one on it is in any way able to make an objective judgment about what problems may occur – they’re probably going to find the nicest piece of property and raise holy hell until they get their way.

ddb October 27, 2010 (2:19 am)

I agree with “Kevin”! Will someone please post any info on when and how we can stop this from happening at either spots!? Like the meeting we need to attend, or the petition I need to sign, etc.! Thank you WSB for posting this!

WSB October 27, 2010 (4:57 am)

DDB – I’m trying to find the actual name of this committee, when it meets, what happens next with this report, etc. Have not succeeded yet but following up with the mayor’s office this morning. – TR

David October 27, 2010 (6:03 am)

Has anyone considered why these people can’t get jobs? Well, the majority of them are either drug addicts or have criminal records that prevent them from getting jobs. Are these the types of people that you want wandering around your neighborhoods while you’re at work? I’m tired of people using the economy as an excuse. Anyone that is motivated can find a job even in this economy. Maybe not your “dream job”, but a job that pays for a roof over your head. Wouldn’t it would make more sense to put them in a vacant industrial lot down by Boeing Field.

AW October 27, 2010 (6:51 am)

Aren’t there a billion islands near Seattle? Couldn’t one of them become “Shelter Island?”

haha October 27, 2010 (7:18 am)

This is a bad idea all around. Delridge has so much crime to begin with. And it reaches out from there. I live on top of pigeon point and have had my car broken into 3 times. And have had my house broken into once while I was away on business and my wife was home alone.

I understand that not all homeless are drug addicts or criminals. But unfortunately a good bit are, whether it be by choice or necessity. Bring a camp like this to a already crime ridden n’hood would be disastrous for those who try to have lives not filled with crime everyday.

I also understand that the homeless have to live somewhere. Squatting in abandoned homes or structures is no way to have to live. It seems that putting these camps near residential areas isn’t the way to go either. But possibly putting them in more industrial areas near bus lines would be best. This would keep them away from homes and yet keep camp near transportation.

Whoever finds out when this committee is meeting please pass along the information ASAP so we can organize and fight this.

JCM October 27, 2010 (7:25 am)

Well, I think we have gotten all the stereotypes out in good order from our NIMBY neighbors. In fact, poor people are not all sexual predators (although they can be duped by them like anyone else); they are not all drug addicts, or alcoholics, or mentally ill,or too lazy to work, or “choosing not to participate in society.” They are poor; they have no place to live. They are our relatives and former neighbors. Being poor is not a crime.
Buy a copy of Real Change; read it. Then move up to talking to some people about what it has been like to have a tent city near them, like Seattle U people, from years ago when they were in the tennis courts. Then actually talk to a homeless person for a minute or two.
Get used to poor people; we have it on good authority that they will always be with us.

flowerpetal October 27, 2010 (7:40 am)

The facts are that there is drop in neighborhoods during the presence of a tent city. Part of the tent city model includes rotating 24 hr. patrols by volunteer residents. It has successfully lowered the incidents of crime in residential areas, crimes such as home burglaries, graffitti, etc.

Cclarue October 27, 2010 (8:00 am)

Just for some perspective I happen to have an aquaintence with a “homeless “induvidual. He parks his beat up old motor home down in Georgetown and does the move it around thing. He states his reason for this living style is he does not want or feel the need to conform to white man society standards are. I zm not sure of his race but he isn’t native American. This really angers me because I also know that he gets food stamps from dshs. He does odd jobs for cash. My main point is that this is very much his choice. And from what I can see he is capable of working but doesn’t want the commitment of a job and a rent payment. I just don’t get it I was raised hearing from my parents “life. Isn’t fair kid, nothing is free, god helps those who help themselves, give a man a fish he rats for a day teach a man to fish he eats for a lifetime ” and as annoying as it was when I was a kid I sure am glad they said it because I took it to heart. I have never not had a job since the day I was legal to work with a workers permit at 15 1/2. I’m now almost 40. I grew up in a very blue collar home. I am constantly amazed at what people think is owed to them.

mags October 27, 2010 (8:07 am)

I don’t see how the I-35 site would be safe with all the traffic there. One drunk guy would get hit running across the roadway to get to the bus stop and the city would be sued for lots of bucks for placing the camp in such a dangerous spot.

iggy October 27, 2010 (8:14 am)

Mags, I had the same reaction to the 35th location. Already a mess there with traffic. Any site needs to have adequate parking and good entry/exit. If you want to see a successful site and camp, go to the Tent City currently in the parking lot at St. Mark’s Cathedral. And the 21 bus is already overpacked and rarely on schedule, so this would be a burden on Metro as well.

Lucky chick October 27, 2010 (8:43 am)

Not sure where I stand on this, but from my limited experience, Tent Cities are tightly run – no drinking, no excessive noise, and no fugitives. (Want to worry about your children? Check out http://www.icrimewatch.net/index.php?AgencyID=54473&disc=). I would want the facilities to be kept clean and confined (and I wouldn’t want them in the right-of-way because of the disturbance and risk of destroying vegetation). But otherwise I’d like to make charitable assumptions rather than react with blind fear. Let’s be compassionate.

Estrella October 27, 2010 (8:43 am)

These camps should be placed in Mercer Island or Bellevue.

Bad Dick! October 27, 2010 (9:59 am)

Josh- your idea is really great. It’s this type of out of the box thinking that the committee should be thinking of. The revamping of buildings not in use is a win for all. This allocation of resources is going to a future we all will be part of be it the suburban malls that are sitting empty or the empty urban schools. Thank you for bringing up an idea that is forward thinking and compassionate!

sarelly October 27, 2010 (10:27 am)

How about putting them in Laurelhurst?

;)

My father was homeless for four years due to mental illness. As a paranoid schizophrenic, he was afraid to stay near the family, didn’t trust anyone, thought everyone was part of The Conspiracy, etc. He slept under highway bridges, worked day labor when he could, and learned to wrap his body in newspaper to stay warm. When he finally surfaced, his mother provided for him for the rest of his life. He was exceptionally lucky. Without her, he probably would have died on the street. He would get a job, then get fired for being crazy. Medication didn’t help enough to make him functional.

I also have a friend with schizophrenia who was homeless for two years, and as a woman found avoiding homeless men to be the biggest challenge to her safety. She now lives in a trailer park and takes classes at the UW. The only reason she got off the street was because she met a man willing to take her in. Would you want to have to sleep your way to safety?

Not everyone with a mental illness is violent; they just need support.

Family Promise is a program using a network of area churches to help homeless parents and children stay sheltered while they save for rent. They mostly seem to have jobs and their kids are in school – but some unforeseen event caused them to lose their homes. They’re not allowed to use drugs or alcohol and the requirements to remain in the program are pretty stringent.

With all the “luxury condominiums” this town has managed to throw up in the past five years, it’s disgraceful that there isn’t more transitional housing and affordable housing.

I get the whole No Entitlements thing. I was on my own at 16. I’ve worked a lot of crummy low-paying jobs. You do what you have to do. But when you do those things and still can’t get by, that’s a sign that the system isn’t working. Seems to me those from middle class backgrounds tend to have a stronger sense of entitlement than those from working class backgrounds – because they’ve been raised to expect they’re going to college and will have professional jobs and need to have the trappings of a middle class life and are inherently better than the working class. People with lower expectations appreciate more of what they have, and what they have has usually been harder for them to get.

As for this plan, I’m not happy about it. I lived with a crazy person for the first sixteen years of my life and dealt with him for many more. I’ve been around enough alcoholics, and every day when I commute I have to run the gauntlet of raging addicts, belligerent panhandlers, etc. We don’t need that in our neighborhoods.

At a certain point I’d expect “enlightened self-interest” to take over. What do we owe other members of society? Anything? Do we take care of people who can’t take care of themselves? Do we help people enough so they can manage their own affairs? Or do we say anyone who can’t make it, screw them, let them die? If we don’t want “them” living in tents in our neighborhoods, for our own benefit if not for theirs, it would be good to find permanent housing in an actual building and not outdoors.

george October 27, 2010 (10:30 am)

I think what really shows is the (lack of) brain power from the mayors staff. I am all for supporting and giving our fair share to the people who need the most help. But was the berm on 35th really the best, thought out location? I know there are restrictions on sites, such as it needs to be city owned property. But a permanent encampment at an active park (yes, it is a park that gets daily use by runners on the slopes) next to a busy highway, and a site undergoing a review that could become a driving range. So you could have vehicles on one side, and errant missles on the other. How warm and safe (and well thought out) is that? What a beautiful site the colorful tents will make as people drive up the hill. Also, many (not all) of these poeple are ineligible for public housing due to previous crimes. So there is a safety aspect to a vulnerable community. Yes, Notme, you stand out as perhaps someone without any children and does not recognize the need to constantly be “on duty” with 5 year olds and under that need to be taught the ways of the world (don’t step into big holes, watch out for strangers, look out for cars) until they reach an age that they can do this for themselves. As responsible parents, we do look out for their best interests because they are unable to do so yet. Mock the people protecting their children, you only show your colors.
Our mayor and his staff is off course. I think more input is needed, and discussion as to why other safer and reasonable sites are not being considered for PERMANENT housings, not just 90 day stretches.

Miranda October 27, 2010 (10:58 am)

In this economy any of us can be poor. Since community is crucial to our local economy, we need to come up with solutions to problems that reflect our whole community. Many poor do indeed work. The people who grow our affordable Organic Good Food at High Point largely came from Cambodia and were homeless for a time. The troubles that befall the Americans I see largely strike our soldiers returning from wars, the people who have accidents, the people who are sensitive to drugs and pollution–born and unborn—and the people who make poor food choices that add to all of the above troubles. Looking, unafraid, at the big picture might help us find solutions rather than adding to the pain and suffering in the world.

kgdlg October 27, 2010 (11:22 am)

I am honestly so disheartened by the West Seattle responses in this thread. Did no one read the stories profiled last month in the Seattle Times about who is living in tent cities and how hard they are typically working to get permanent affordable housing and jobs? Just in case, here is the link: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/flatpages/local/invisiblefamilies.html

Many homeless who would live here are families. That is right – kids included – yet sadly so many above have jumped to the tired assumption that it will be packed with crackheads and mentally ill dangerous people. I am not saying this makes the recommended locations in West Seattle the “right” ones, but please, can we base our statements on some level of accuracy and truth – that the majority of folks living in tent cities are actually working poor and not registered sex offenders?

I really thought this might be an opportunity for our community to embrace something that is desperately needed in this City – a permanent home for a tent city – and work with it to make it the best run location yet. I for one would welcome this community here in West Seattle, even if it were literally in my backyard.

sarelly October 27, 2010 (11:49 am)

But why does it have to be a TENT city? Why are tent cities even being proposed? So many empty buildings, including vacant office spaces (and the ubiquitous fancy condominiums nobody’s buying.) A tent city probably wouldn’t be necessary if there were adequate funding for real housing, so if we don’t want this to happen, we need to support spending for social services. Maybe if it was called a “camp ground” instead of a “tent city” it would be more acceptable. This is the Northwest, after all. Thanks for the link.

kgdlg October 27, 2010 (11:52 am)

@george
As an affordable housing developer, I can tell you that the need for affordable housing in this city far outstrips our current ability to finance and build it. So, from my point of view, tent cities are a necessary evil right now. I hate to think of anyone living in a tent, but I think it is worse to think of a family living in a tent and having to move every 90 days. That means that the kid in that tent has to either change schools every 90 days or figure out how to get to their school from a new neighborhood, likely on public transit, every 3 months. Not good for them and not good for us as a society.

kgdlg October 27, 2010 (11:58 am)

@sarelly
i agree that it is crazy how many vacant buildings and homes there are that we cannot access for shelters and/or affordable housing. the hulk of an orange eyesoar at 35th and avalon is an example of this…but the sad, very sad, truth is that the majority of these buildings are owned by banks that would rather sit on them and wait for the market to return instead of finishing them or selling them to let them be used for affordable housing. and as far as trying to get a national bank to agree to a temporary use of a building for homeless people – i think liability risk is the main barrier there – unless it is a city owned building – private institutions are loath to take on any additional “risk”. (i.e. they don’t want to get sued if someone trips and falls in the building) that is why you see the city opening up public buildings like city hall for shelters…they see that the benefit outweighs the risk for them, that it will cost them more in the long run in emergency services etc. to have people living on the streets unsheltered than inside on really bad weather nights.

DP October 27, 2010 (11:58 am)

I visited the tent city at the Port Property (T-107) a number of times two summers ago. It didn’t seem so bad . . . There was a little more dog poop around than usual, but I certainly didn’t get the feeling that it was a refuge for criminals and drug addicts, and I don’t recall any reports of crime going up in the area during those months.
.
Photo: http://tinyurl.com/T-107-Tent-City
.
Whatever the City does on this, I hope they get plenty of citizen input first. With this type of emotionally charged issue, it will surely backfire on the City if folks get the feeling that something is being rammed down their throats. (Reference: Deep Bore Tunnel)
.
I don’t think it was wise for the City to introduce this as a proposal for a “permanent” tent city, for example. Instead, I suggest the proposal be changed to make the tent city’s status provisional and subject to an annual review of the following issues:
.
1) How are local crime rates affected by the tent city?
.
2) Is the area being kept clean and sanitary by the residents?
.
3) Are residents making reasonable attempts to find jobs and/or permanent housing?
.
4) Are non-profits doing their part?
.
.
If enough people rise up against this, it will go down in flames. OK. That’s democracy. But I for one am willing to consider a tent city (yes, even in my “back yard”) as long as it’s well planned and as long as there’s an escape clause in the contract in case it doesn’t work out.
.
I thought the Third Runway was going to turn out to be a nightmare, too. But in the end, it wasn’t.
.
—David

sarelly October 27, 2010 (11:59 am)

What can WE personally DO to help?

WSB October 27, 2010 (12:03 pm)

I should jump in on that … remember West Seattle-based Family Promise of Seattle, a unique partnership offering temporary food and shelter to newly homeless families (and keeping them together, which they can’t generally do in the shelter system) is still trying to raise money to reopen. They have another fundraiser coming up Nov. 6, the “Comfort Food Throwdown” – http://www.familypromiseofseattle.org

Steph in WS October 27, 2010 (12:03 pm)

Thank you kgdig and others who do support the camp. I don’t mind one bit. These people need help. My father-n-law was on the street for a number of years, yes mostly from being an alcoholic, but he still needed the help and was lucky enough to have a family out here that found him and took him in. A lot of those people may not have that kind of help. Give a damn about your fellow human for onece!

Steph in WS October 27, 2010 (12:04 pm)

And another thing. A lot of these people can’t get jobs because they don’t have an address.

kgdlg October 27, 2010 (12:13 pm)

Thanks WSB for the link to that shelter trying to reopen…it is needed here so much.

Again, I want to urge everyone who is against tent cities and the people who inhabit them to read this series in the Times:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/flatpages/local/invisiblefamilies.html

@Steph, thanks for sharing your personal story. I think it is important to remember that it takes sometimes a stablizing place to live (even in a tent) for folks to address some of the issues that sometimes make them homeless, like mental illness. Remembering that that person is someone’s father, brother, sister, is really important in this debate. I am not saying that there are not issues to be aware of – like sex offender status – but just that there will be a diversity of people living here, not all of which are criminals and most of which are simply human beings struggling to get a break in life. Regardless of where you fall in the debate, I think this is a fact and something we all need to keep in mind.

sarelly October 27, 2010 (12:27 pm)

Thanks, WSB, for the heads up about Family Promise and also for the info on the encampment recommendations. They say the encampments would be for people who are capable of “self-management.” That means people who can function, such as poor working families. It doesn’t mean active addicts or alcoholics, mentally ill people who need more support – and they specifically say no registered sex offenders allowed. The recommendations also suggest semi-permanent structures. What the City doesn’t say in this document is how they will go about finding more housing, although they clearly state this is a temporary solution.

Cclarue October 27, 2010 (1:30 pm)

There has to be a better answer than a tent it is going to be a cold winter. Low end apartments rent for 700 ish a month. Y can’t 2 families or 4 men split an apt and the rent 350 a fAmily or under 200 each man?? And they get running water and a toilet?? Minimum wage would even cover that. It’s not the location of the tent city that bothers me. It’s the whole idea. It seems absurd.

goob October 27, 2010 (1:54 pm)

I wonder just how many of the people posting here actually live in West Seattle near these proposed locations. My guess is not many, and certainly not the posts supporting this retarded plot by Mayor McNut and his homeless advocate darlings.

Well I do, and this is total BS. Not one single site east of I-5. If you think this is going to land within 5 miles of Magnolia you are also retarded. Not once single site other than West Seattle that will have a real impact in residential neighborhoods. Certainly not Laurelhurst…oh NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! They win the NIMBY fight because they have money and influence.

As usual, just stick it to the poor side of West Seattle; they are used to getting crapped on, now literally in West Seattle taxpayer’s front yards. This is a full cram down of elite political correctness on all those West Seattle schmucks who can’t defend themselves.

I want my vote back on this clown of a Mayor. What a poser.

HolyKow October 27, 2010 (3:02 pm)

My personal favorite in this list is putting this camp by the Ghetto Liquor Store on 35th and Morgan…yeah, cause that area is not in the news every month or so with a kid getting bitten by a dog or some racist woman wishing for her gun to kill a pedestrian because she is different or other dog attacks that I personally have witnessed or the robberies that take place there or…or…or…or…

So the tax payers cannot get/get severely curtailed services now from local city entities, but the NON-taxpayers get all kinds of great consideration, we are spending money in all kinds of hippy feel good places and can’t keep enough cops on the streets, libraries are closing for chunks of time, city furloughs, park closures or the workers furloughed for several days a year…but hey, let’s all gather round and sing kumbaya and build a homeless camp for the people that do not currently contribute to the tax base (not a statement of fault on their part, just a reality of 90+% of the homeless/jobless) that is being spent dry on basics (public safety, schools, the already significant output of monies into the hands of the unfortunate of our time).

There may be a time and place for this when times are not the worst since ’29, but now is NOT IT.

hk

ZS October 27, 2010 (3:35 pm)

OK, so like most on this discussion I do not think these West Seattle locations make any sense due to proximity to homes, schools, safety, security, existing poverty and crime in the area, etc.

But, with the understanding that homelessness needs to be addressed, there could be a compromise that satisfies most. I think the key concern is that this would be a permanent camp. That would definitely hurt the neighborhood in terms of drop in home values (like anyone needs that in today’s market) and increase in crime (yes, crime will get worse and do you think Delridge needs more crime?).

So if there could be a guarantee that the camp would move every 3 or 6 months, in a pre-planned and organized way, this should resolve that. Moves could also be a great way to meet with all the residents and confirm they are 1. looking for employment, 2. following the rules and 3. not hiding sex offenders or felons. Yes, it would be inconvenient but these are people being provided with a free service paid for by tax paying citizens. It should come with conditions.

Bettytheyeti October 27, 2010 (3:56 pm)

Permanent Temporary Housing. Ha, sounds like an oxymoron.

I like the idea of using empty school buildings or maybe the soon to be empty Liquor Store.

I’d like to see the list of those making site recommendations. How is it no sites East of I-5. Hmmm?

@HolyKow: Getto Liquor store at Morgan/35th would certainly remain in the WSBlog headlines. Competition for the Highpoint Hoodlums.

But the main problem is the number of “residents.” A 100 of anything is too much! Really 100 homeless folks. How about breaking up the number, as opposed to corralling them? Sprinkle them in all parts of the city, not just make a getto for them or us.

AJ October 27, 2010 (8:10 pm)

A PERMANENT tent city? Why? For the fun of camping out, without a home? This is ridiculous. Mike McGinn is perhaps the worst mayor in Seattle history.

gg October 27, 2010 (9:43 pm)

30 day snapshot of fsnt city crime in Bothell

Since early June 2004:

* June 19: At least one camp resident was ejected for causing a disturbance. A married couple were involved. The wife was wanted on a felony escape warrant. The original charge against her was for forgery. She was booked into the King County Jail.
* June 24: Tent City 4 security ejected two residents, one for being disruptive and the other for being under the influence of alcohol. Bothell police arrested the second person for drunken driving.
* June 26: A Bothell police officer heard a scream from the camp and discovered that a man had allegedly tried to slap and choke his pregnant wife. The man was arrested.
* July 1: Four camp residents were kicked out. One person was wanted on a felony warrant for escaping from community custody, which was because of a drug-possession conviction.
* July 5: A male camp resident reportedly picked on an African American man at Tent City 4. The man claimed to be a white supremacist and Ku Klux Klan member and used a racial epithet in front of Bothell police. Camp security kicked the man out.

goodgraces October 27, 2010 (10:44 pm)

Honestly, I have nothing against homeless people. But I sure do against bureaucratic, in-the-box-thinking politicians and foolish civic “panels” that come up with such myopic ideas. Josh hit the nail SPOT ON the head — what are all these empty school district buildings doing for anyone? Why not (temporarily or permanently) repurpose them for housing?

Has anyone walked or driven by and really looked at any of these shuttered WS facilities recently? I’d say they’re as much of a shame as any homeless tent installation would be. Sad, sad, sad. Does the right hand even know what the left one is doing in this city?!

Dora October 27, 2010 (11:33 pm)

I get so tired of hearing all the comments about how we should help the “poor”. Bull – I grew up poor, but working on a farm. I can guarantee you most of the hard working farmers in this country are poor. Does anyone go out of their way to support them, all you ‘do-gooders’ buy your imported groceries from abroad and don’t think a thing about it, because it is “cheaper”. But you will give up space in our cites that good hard working people pay for. These people are not “poor” they are lazy or non-conformist. They live in a blue tarp tent because it is their choice. The are there because of their own lack of initiative or poor decisions, be that not finishing their education, drugs, whatever. I am tired of being penalize for working hard and being a successful productive member of society. These people maintain this lifestyle because our society allows it, not because they have to.

no October 27, 2010 (11:47 pm)

The proposed delridge site is LITERALLY a few blocks from my house, which is almost 100 grand underwater right now I might add. if this happens I will promptly give my house back to the bank and move. most likely east side. They seem immune from all this stuff. homeless people are not all bad, I just don’t want a permanent site of 100-150 living in my “up and coming” residential neighborhood.

D.Reno October 28, 2010 (1:23 am)

Mayor McJoke is not very funny anymore. Why dump bums in West Seattle? Because he can, because no one will stand up to him. Why not have a few of them stay at McMayors house for a while? Hmmm, guess McShwinn doesn’t really believe after all. Sure, ruin Camp Long – one of the few “urban wilderness” parks left in the country. For what? So men with drug/alcohol/criminal issues can reside among our children rather than deal with their issues.

BTW, McDonald’s is always hiring. Parking lots are always hiring. Security guards…janitorial services…etc… Work 2 jobs if you have to. Get a room mate. Put down the smokes and bottle and get a job, have some dignity…THAT IS THE SOLUTION TO HOMELESSNESS.

SteveM October 28, 2010 (7:12 am)

I’m heartened by the compassionate posts in this thread and the ones whose criticism focuses on how a policy recommendation like this is made. The NIMBYism and generalities about homeless people makes me sad.

Jo Parsons October 28, 2010 (8:45 am)

I have previously worked with the homeless and know that “fixing” the problem is very complex on many levels. However, I don’t approve of the 35th and Edmonds site. It’s too visible from 35th and inappropriate for the homeowners and elderly in that neighborhood. People need a degree of privacy wherever they live, including the homeless. I liked the idea of the location near Highpoint Medical Center. I plan to write the Mayor’s office.

Bettytheyeti October 28, 2010 (9:51 am)

@ Jo Parsons, I take it you live a stones throw from the Medical Center at Highpoint. Sarcasm here.

Bettytheyeti October 28, 2010 (10:09 am)

Also note the Advisory board says if necessary it will increase beyond 150 homeless once that benchmark is met. You don’t get to have it both ways, up property taxes for social services then watch property decline because you want one neighborhood to absorb all of the City of Seattle’s social ills. Do you really believe that all these homeless folks out started out in Seattle?

D.Reno October 28, 2010 (10:23 am)

Please dispel us of our “generalities” Steve. I traveled the country at one time as a “homeless” hobo. Seattle is THE place to go for free food, housing and cash. Able bodied men who are homeless are A) on the run from the law, B) running from child support C) menatally ill D) addicted to drugs and achohol E) on a non-conformist kick F) lazy and make more money from panhandling than working. …Etc…

Homeless women with kids are taken care of IF their case is brought to attention of agencies and or churches.

STOP YOUR FAKE, PHONY, IGNORANT “COMPASSION” – IT IS ACTUALLY ENABLING.

goob October 28, 2010 (10:40 am)

@ SteveM – Betting you dont live anywhere near the two sites in WS. Also betting you would be singing a different tune if it was YOUR back yard.

This is nothing but a gigantic PC feel good dump on WS by McSchwinn and his hippy feel good inner circle. I want to know where the city council is on this issue- They need to be on notice- McSchwinn is complete tool and out of control- and if a council member is in favor of this cram down…there will be hell to pay.

So, where exactly does the council stand?

sarelly October 28, 2010 (11:06 am)

Theoretically if there WERE money for social services, we wouldn’t have so many homeless people. I think the anti-“handout” contingent, voting against social services funding, brings about exactly this type of situation. It takes a lot of money to get off the street – first, last, security deposit for an apartment. At minimum wage, it takes time to save that much. People who live paycheck to paycheck can’t afford to be unemployed, to get injured, or to have problems. It’s not like the crimes going on in a homeless encampment are any worse or different than the ones going on in homes all over town – or amongst the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, for that matter. It’s not like people who live in nice houses and pay taxes are not sometimes also scummy and sleazy. People are people, and have the same problems across all income levels. Rich people can be “non-conforming” and famous because of it. What it comes down is whether you feel you are your brother’s keeper, or not. If not, God help you if you ever need assistance. A Tent City is still a stupid idea. There are plenty of vacant buildings, many of which are owned by the City. Those buildings would have to be re-zoned and brought up to code for residential use. Most likely the laws wouldn’t let them just stuff people into vacant buildings.

Ibu Oni October 28, 2010 (1:42 pm)

October 28, 2010

An Open Letter to Our MAYBE (maybe not) Future Neighbors:

Here’s a Greeting and Invitation from the men, women, children and pets of Nickelsville!

We cordially invite you to a Halloween Open House this Sunday, October 31st. Our Halloween Theme this year is ‘Face Your Fears!.’ This event will be held from 2:00 to 6:00 PM and will feature fun and entertainment for the whole family. There will be tours, treats, and opportunities to get to know each other one on one!

So come on out and celebrate with us! We are located on the NE corner of NE 45th Street and 15th Avenue NE in the parking lot of University Congregational United Church of Christ in the University District.

BE THERE OR BE SCARED!

gg October 28, 2010 (4:52 pm)

Here is a nice little thread by Ibu Oni (aka-one of the founders of Nickelsville) and a good indication of why McSchwinn wants to stick WS with these freeloading thugs instead of his front yard:

http://www.homelessforums.org/showthread.php?t=4389

Here is another announcing the “good news about Seattle” to other homeless out of state:

http://www.homelessforums.org/showthread.php?t=5217

Scared…Yes indeed – Future WS neighbors (freeloaders)…ehphatically HELL NO!!!

Jose Rizell October 28, 2010 (5:04 pm)

You are RIGHT ON !

Seattle is THE place to go for free food, housing and cash. Able bodied men who are homeless are A) on the run from the law, B) running from child support C) menatally ill D) addicted to drugs and achohol E) on a non-conformist kick F) lazy and make more money from panhandling than working. …Etc…

Homeless women with kids are taken care of IF their case is brought to attention of agencies and or churches.

STOP YOUR FAKE, PHONY, IGNORANT “COMPASSION” – IT IS ACTUALLY ENABLING.

Comment by D.Reno — October 28, 10 10:23 am #

Bettytheyeti October 28, 2010 (6:33 pm)

Fresh from Council President Richard Conlin’s desk: “We have suggested a vacant warehouse, even, would be better than in a tent outside, and encouraged exploration of alternatives such as that.” His response to my question this afternoon about “dropping” 150 homeless people in tents in W. Seattle. Mayor McBike, strikes again.

gg October 28, 2010 (9:40 pm)

yup

bjinseattle October 29, 2010 (2:32 pm)

My only objection to Nicklesville moving to West Seattle or elsewhere is that we will miss them – they’ve been great neighbors! My family and I wish they could stay in “our backyard.” If they do wind up in your neighborhood, stop by, say hi, drop off a pot of soup or offer to do a load of laundry. You’ll have a lot of new and valued friends if you keep your minds and hearts open!

gg October 29, 2010 (5:00 pm)

Yeah that sounds great! Bring them soup and do their laundry. wonderful. Better count my blessings, I only have to feed the dog now. It sleeps and craps IMBY, but at least I don’t have to do its laundry. You are welcome to keep these freeloading thugs (“friends”) in your back yard, but stay the hell away from mine.

sxpk4sr October 30, 2010 (9:25 am)

I’m lookin’ at a map here…
Montana seems to have plenty of room…
One way bus tickets for all

mimi October 30, 2010 (1:45 pm)

I really dislike this idea. West Seattle has enough issues. I am going to camp out in the Mayor’s front yard if this happens!!! I miss Greg Nickels… WSB, please keep us up to date, so we can be a part of this decision making process.

goob October 30, 2010 (4:26 pm)

@bjinseattle – Oh great. So now we not only are asked to provide a free hippy KOA in our neighborhood at the expense of our property values going to zero…but we get to feed them and do their laundry. Thats just wonderful…gee sounds too good to be true. Give me a break. You can keep your SHARE thugs, but my guess is you are one of them.

natinstl October 31, 2010 (5:33 pm)

I can appreciate them wanting to assauge our fears with this meeting on Oct. 31st, but frankly even if it brought no crime, child molesters and every other thing that people are worried about…it will decrease property values and we will forever be known as the place with the homeless camp. People already attach a stigma to West Seattle because they think it’s like the more crime ridden areas of White Center. Putting a homeless camp in the middle of a residential area where people have spent substantial amounts of money to buy a house, pay property taxes, water, sewage etc.. is ridiculous and it’s not a solution. Why doesn’t the mayor propose putting this in his neighborhood, or maybe Magnolia, Wallingford, Mt. Baker etc…?

Bill Cady October 31, 2010 (6:57 pm)

I read comments about not wanting to “take care of us”, and we don’t want that. All we want is a chance to make our way back into the world and live like human beings again. I strive for that every day on my blog.

Yesterday’s post was in honor of Rufus Hannah, one of the original homeless guys in the “bum fights”. He made it back out, thank God.

http://atmyfriendsplace.com/a-sick-trend-homeless-bashing

Bill

goob October 31, 2010 (8:59 pm)

What on earth is “we” comment in your post above Bill? Check your blog. You are a California insurance agent driving around in your convertiable with your dog fluffy! Are your friggin kidding??? These are REAL issues for West Seattle neighborhoods. We do not want SHARE/WHEEL freeloaders who refuse traditional available shelter camping out in our neighborhood PERMANATLY. Get a clue, and butt out poser.

MarySheely October 31, 2010 (10:24 pm)

So, what are the stats on housing values near one of these? Since one of the proposed sites is literally three blocks from our house.

goob November 1, 2010 (6:13 am)

Mary, I am not sure there are any statistics on the property value decrease when city government imposes a permanent shanty town in the middle of a residential city neighborhood…simply because no other city government has ever been stupid enough to implement such a scam.

Perhaps the Mayor’s office can enlighten us as to what the financial impact will be to residents impacted by this brilliant plan. Maybe like a ground zero map like ones used for atomic bomb blast with concentric rings showing levels of devastation radiating out from the center of the blast.

Any study on this Mayor McSchwinn, or Uncle Nick? Anyone…Anyone? I guess that was not a top priority when you were driving around deciding what taxpayer owned real estate to gift to your activist SHARE buddies.