More possible encampment sites? Council majority says ‘no’

Though the plan to close the “Nickelsville” encampment in West Seattle has been final for a while, a semi-related proposal to allow more potential encampment sites in the city didn’t come up for a final vote until today – and a majority of City Councilmembers said no. The proposal sought to set up a process by which temporary encampment sites could be approved, with a long list of rules and prerequisites – you can read them here. Its sponsor, Councilmember Nick Licata, was one of four “yes” votes, along with Councilmembers Sally Bagshaw, Bruce Harrell, and Mike O’Brien; “no” votes were by Council President Sally Clark and Councilmembers Tim Burgess, Richard Conlin, Jean Godden, and Tom Rasmussen.

Mike July 30, 2013 (8:00 am)

Finally, a little sanity prevails.

HP Mom July 30, 2013 (8:45 am)

They should evaluate the impact of Nickelsville to the surrounding areas before they propose another site. Just this morning, saw a girl “living” on the side of 1st ave bridge. Nickelsville has definitely attracted people who think they can “live” & use the general area as their own.

flimflam July 30, 2013 (9:15 am)

gee, why would it be a bad idea to let people camp/take over land that doesn’t belong to them?

JoB July 30, 2013 (9:28 am)

this headline says it all…

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/07/29/council-votes-to-leave-homeless-camps-unregulated

the facts are that there are far more homeless people in Seattle than there are beds for them…
even when you count the worst of the flea ridden legal and illegal shelter beds

homeless people are going to band together wherever they can for safety and to share resources.

the question was whether those encampments would be well regulated encampments providing safety and oversight for both campers and nearby residents

or whether they would be what you complain about now.

our city council is well aware of those facts
but still opted to leave them unregulated

I don’t know what kind of sanity you think that is..
but the reality is that this kind of sanity will have them camping in your local greenbelts, in the parks, in your alley and on your public streets.

maybe not the best choice after all

stephanie July 30, 2013 (11:43 am)

Agreed JoB. If I were homelss, I would rather camp then try to stay at one of the shelters.

Charles July 30, 2013 (11:57 am)

If Seattle wasn’t so eager to bend over backwards to make things easy for any vagrant who wants to camp on the taxpayer’s dime, we wouldn’t have so many homeless people.

There are plenty of other, less-expensive places to exist on the edges of society.

Nobody has a right to permanently encamp in the public spaces of our city just because they can’t afford to live here.

Mike July 30, 2013 (1:14 pm)

These are mostly the professionally-homeless. Every society has them. I am not sure what to do with them – they are unable to take care of themselves. As a society, we need to take care of them. But we do not owe them anything special.

wsparent July 30, 2013 (2:12 pm)

I know which candidate for mayor will NOT get my vote!

JoB July 30, 2013 (7:36 pm)

Mike.. my experience with West Seattle’s homeless population for the past couple of years does not support the premise that these are professionally homeless people…
.
unless you list among the professionally homeless those waiting for a space on subsidized housing lists, those waiting for social security applications to go through, those waiting for earned VA benefits to be granted, evicted families and seniors and those recovering from life threatening illnesses and surgeries.
.
these are the people for whom our system supposedly provides a safety net…
and would if the need didn’t exceed the supply

Grandma July 30, 2013 (8:43 pm)

My prayers have been answered. The bums are finally going to get kicked out of Seattle. This nice city does not deserve to be overrun with thugs, deadbeats, and bums.

miws July 30, 2013 (10:32 pm)

My prayers have been answered. The bums are finally going to get kicked out of Seattle. This nice city does not deserve to be overrun with thugs, deadbeats, and bums.

Grandma, to whom do you pray?

Mike

Ajax July 31, 2013 (12:26 am)

@miws – I’m guessing one of the Rand’s, Ayn or Paul, six of one…

rico July 31, 2013 (6:23 am)

Below is a link to a story in Hawaii, where they are going to send homeless people back to their original home –

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2381732/Hawaii-sets-aside-100-000-offer-17-000-homeless-people-way-airfare-home-states.html

JoB July 31, 2013 (8:44 am)

grandma..
the “bums” are getting kicked out of their encampement called Nickelsville..
but that doesn’t mean they will be leaving Seattle
or even West Seattle

JoB July 31, 2013 (8:54 am)

rico..

there is a huge difference between throwing the bums out and offering them transportation home.

if you want to be part of the solution, you too can offer to pay bus fare home for someone who wants to leave Seattle’s empty promise and go back to their support system at home.

i have personally “cleared our streets” of about a dozen homeless people in the last couple of years.. and only know of 2 who came back.

it’s a self help program that works…

rico July 31, 2013 (9:05 am)

Job,

My part of the solution is making damn sure my kids have the tools to not become homeless. If more parents did that the problem would be smaller.

I would fully support taxpayer funds to relocate

JoB July 31, 2013 (9:40 am)

rico..
i agree. i wish every kid had parents like you.
.
heck.. i wish every parent had kids like you because the security we thought we had built for ourselves is far less secure than we want to think.
.
in my not so humble opinion.. relocation funds for any homeless person who was ready to go home would have been a much better use of public funds than handing 500,00 over to UGM to pass on to pre-qualified Nickelsville “residents” for a day…

j July 31, 2013 (6:24 pm)

If the people in Nicklesville gave back one iota to the community they leach off of there might have been a diferent outcome.
If the poeple of Nickelsville volunteered a few hours per week to remove ivy and rehab the greenbelt there might have been a different outcome. If the people of Nicklesville picked up garbage in the area and pulled weeds while they beg for money by every stop light….things might have been different. Instead there is a circle of litter where they stand, cigarette butts, grafitti and they don’t volunteer time nor do they want to.
Isn’t it amazing how homeless poeple can’t afford the basics to live but have the budget to smoke cigarettes???
There is no such thing as curing homelessness.
More will come.
Ask San Francisco!!!

JoB August 1, 2013 (7:39 am)

j..

I agree that the homeless in Nickelsville could have done a lot more to keep their part of the agreement with the community
.
but i also think the community could have done a lot more for Nickelsville.
.
if half of the people who whine here about homeless people smoking roll your own cheap tobacco cigarettes had volunteered even an hour in Nickelsville there would have been a different outcome there.
.
Nickelsville failed because of the lack of public involvement.
.
There are a lot of reasons for that,
but the biggest one is the attitude that it’s ok to let human beings perish as long as you devalue them as people.

Sorry, comment time is over.