City-authorized West Seattle encampment? Former site listed as ‘potential future’ site on new map the mayor just made public

When the city launched a process to come up with three sites to house up to 100 homeless people each, it was promised that they’d come up with a list of city-owned properties as the next step. Now, we have the first list. No West Seattle sites on the “preferred” list, but one familiar site is on the “potential future locations” list – while the address on the new map (7115 2nd Avenue SW) is slightly different, the “Glassyard” description indicates it’s at the site of the original home of the encampment calling itself “Nickelsville” (which was evicted almost two years ago). See the map above; here’s what the mayor’s office announced:

Today Mayor Ed Murray released a map of City-owned properties most suitable for new permitted encampments to serve at least 200 individuals experiencing homelessness. The mayor will transmit a resolution on the encampment sites to the Seattle City Council tomorrow.

The three preferred City-owned sites for 2015 are:

· 2826 NW Market Street for approximately 52 residents.
· 3234 17th Avenue W for approximately 70 residents.
· S. Industrial Way between 5th and 6th Avenue S for approximately 78 residents.

Four City-owned sites were identified as potential future locations:

· 8030 15th Avenue NW for approximately 36 residents.
· 3830 4th Avenue NE for approximately 64 residents.
· 7115 2nd Avenue SW for approximately 95 residents.
· 7110 Rainier Avenue S for approximately 32 residents.

“Permitted encampments are not a permanent solution to the crisis of homelessness we are experiencing in Seattle,” said Murray. “These encampments will provide a safer community environment than sleeping under a highway overpass or on a park bench. Residents will have improved access to services and we hope to open the door to permanent housing as quickly as we can.”

This year the mayor proposed and the City Council unanimously adopted an ordinance that allows up to three permitted encampments of no more than 100 persons each on City-owned or private property. Each location will be permitted for one year, with the possibility of permit renewal for an additional year. Each site must be vacant for one year between encampments.

“The One Night Count, tells us that there were over 2800 people in our community living without shelter this year,” said Councilmember Mike O’Brien. “Identifying city-owned sites for transitional encampments is an important next step. I look forward to working with community to establish up to three sites where people can stay safely and in community as we seek permanent housing solutions.”

“I am right by Mayor Murray’s side as we create safe spaces for community members who are without shelter,” said Councilmember Sally Bagshaw. “Managed encampments will offer the most basic resources for people, such as a 24-hour shelter with public health services, hygiene facilities, and potentially access to electricity. I wholeheartedly support this approach which will make our city better for all of us.”

Before recommending the sites, Seattle’s Department of Planning and Development reviewed more than 135 vacant City-owned parcels. The ordinance adopted by the Council limits encampment locations to unused property in non-residential zones, excluding park properties. Each encampment must be at least one mile from other legal encampments.

The City estimates that one-time start-up costs for the encampments will be $32,000, with annual lease costs and services for encampment residents of approximately $200,000 already provided in the 2015 budget.

Seattle’s Human Services Department (HSD) has selected two encampment operators through a qualification review process: SHARE and Nickelsville. The encampment ordinance requires that operators have prior experience managing shelters, low-income housing or homeless encampments. The Murray Administration continues to reach out to other faith-based and non-profit organizations that may be interested in operating an encampment.

The encampment operators are responsible for safety and security within the camp and residents will be screened by the operators for acceptance. A third organization, Low Income Housing Institute, will provide case management services to individuals living in the encampments.

HSD contractors and staff will make regular site visits to support SHARE and Nickelsville, and coordinate public health, medical outreach and food assistance.

“A place to store your things, sit and talk with friends, and rest your head at night are taken for granted by most of us,” said Mark Putnam of the Committee to End Homelessness in King County. “For many, however, these are not givens. Encampments can offer a temporary safe place for people to be human, while working to get back into stable housing.”

“The Mayor rightly sees the crisis facing people experiencing homelessness as requiring a response that includes the safety and community of sanctioned encampments,” said Michael Ramos of the Church Council of Greater Seattle. “We welcome this step to expand the continuum of care to meet this most basic of human needs.”

Encampment operators will form a Community Advisory Committee to respond to community concerns, review operations standards, and work with neighbors when encampments move to new permitted sites.

More information is available on HSD’s website.

On that page you’ll find this FAQ as well as backstory. The previous encampment site was known as 7116 W. Marginal Way SW so we have a followup question out to the mayor’s office regarding the address discrepancy.

5:04 PM: Quick reply from Murray spokesperson Jason Kelly, just after we published this: He confirms the “potential future location” on 2nd SW is the same site where there’s been an encampment in the past, an SDOT-owned parcel adjoining state-owned land.

54 Replies to "City-authorized West Seattle encampment? Former site listed as 'potential future' site on new map the mayor just made public"

  • whatdoesitmatter June 29, 2015 (5:12 pm)

    How will the Community Advisory Councils control the meth addicts who live out of their cars at the camps? There was no such control at Nicklesville. And the dealing and users migrated up the hill into Highland Park an the Duwamish Greenbelt.

    Not a pleasant experience. But seriously, how will the inevitable draw be dealt with. That’s my question, not to WSB commenters, but to Nicklesville and Share. They weren’t able to the first go around. It was constant churn and mayhem.

    Every area should get its turn, but I think this is my reason to sell.

    Bye Highland Park. West Seattle you are off the hook. Way to take it for the team.

  • DW June 29, 2015 (5:19 pm)

    Well, let’s hope it doesn’t come to this. Feel sorry for Ballard. They are really drawing the short straw on this.

  • flimflam June 29, 2015 (5:44 pm)

    wow. rents along market st in Ballard are steep. free rent along that stretch? good for you I guess…

  • JoAnne June 29, 2015 (6:06 pm)

    No. No no no.
    We finally, finally, FINALLY got rid of that hideous cesspool of meth heads on W Marginal Way.
    We are not doing this again.

  • flimflam June 29, 2015 (6:08 pm)

    also, it seems like the city wants to be sure that the recently built “urban rest stop” in ballard is heavily used. maybe its coincidence, but it seems like “build it and they will come”. or “build it and we will make sure they come”

  • Eric1 June 29, 2015 (6:11 pm)

    Wow none in the Mayor’s Capitol Hill neighborhood? So surprised since it is so close to downtown. With light rail and the SLUT extension I would think it would be an ideal place. LOL….

  • Bree June 29, 2015 (6:18 pm)

    Unfortunately, there are people that are homeless that cannot find housing. They are good people and not drug addicts. As we have attempted to help several find housing, we find the walls of waiting lists of 1 – 3 years. We have gone through lists and lists and sources and sources in attempting to find housing for a couple of senior guys with lower income. They are nice people where the place they were renting in was sold and they have to move. Problem is where? Many calls, e-mails, still no place to call home here in West Seattle where they work. We wish it was easier to help find a home for them and yet we know many others are in the same position they are as inexpensive housing disappears and rents are increased. At least there is the homeless camp for those that feel comfortable going there. These are not bad people, just people down on their luck needing a break. Granted there are some that are not good and we are not denying that. We need help finding homes and wish the city would build or provide more units for them here in West Seattle. Buildings going up all over the place and nothing for seniors or low income? We never knew it was so bad out there until we started helping find something for them!!! ….until one walks in the other person’s shoes….

  • Alan June 29, 2015 (6:27 pm)

    The old Nicklesville location always looks good to people that don’t live anywhere close. I’ll concede there are some close neighbors that don’t care, but once was too much for me.

  • JanS June 29, 2015 (6:33 pm)

    let the haters begin…

  • dsa June 29, 2015 (6:36 pm)

    Close enough, done that, NO!

  • CS in HP June 29, 2015 (6:47 pm)

    “With the possibility of permit renewal for an additional year” and the two “qualified” operations candidates are SHARE and Nickelsville… Sounds pretty familiar- highland park just hosted for two years, was exposed to the complete incompetence of SHARE and Nickelsville as camp operators, and is just now rebounding from it- isn’t there a neighborhood on the list that hasn’t hosted yet? And how is that “possibility” of permit renewal determined?

  • miws June 29, 2015 (7:10 pm)

    Thank you for what you are doing, Bree…



  • Paul June 29, 2015 (7:14 pm)

    No, no, no and no. They mayor can gear up for a community challenge to his clearly imparted judgement and the very real possibility of being a one term mayor.

  • Raina June 29, 2015 (7:17 pm)

    Does anyone know what the success rate is, or even what success looks like, at these encampments?

  • West Seattle Hipster June 29, 2015 (7:30 pm)

    Highland Park has done it’s part, next time it’s West Seattle’s turn how about Hiawatha Park?

  • smokeycretin9 June 29, 2015 (7:49 pm)


  • Seattlite June 29, 2015 (8:29 pm)

    This plan is seriously flawed mostly because of the drug-addicted homeless and there are many. Murray is a one-term mayor. He has made one poor decision after another. His poor decisions have adversely affected neighborhoods, transportation.

  • Kristen June 29, 2015 (8:45 pm)

    These ‘meth heads’ don’t simply appear out of nowhere when a encampment is established. They are on our streets and in our neighborhoods. It’s just easier to ignor them when they are not concentrated in one place.

    Raina, sucess in my mind is giving these people a more secure and comfortable place to call a home and giving them a sense of community. Just my personal opinion of success.

    These ‘meth heads’ are human beings who deserve compassion. I’d probably be on meth to if I had to endure what they do every day. Sure, there are truly bad homeless people out there, but that generalized view for the rest is unwarranted. Our society suffers from casting these generalizations on many other minority populations and it becomes too news headlines on a frequent basis.

    And yes, I know my opinion is probably a very unpopular one. I unfortunately suffer from a serious case of compassion.

  • DD June 29, 2015 (8:49 pm)

    Terminal 5.

  • julie98106 June 29, 2015 (9:12 pm)

    I live in West Seattle, in the 9200 block of 21st SW. Homeless people are all around here. The Salvation Army and the Food bank are just over on 16th.
    I went to go out yesterday morning, and a woman was sitting on the sidewalk putting on makeup. The homeless are already here, and it seems many of them are Meth addicted. There are abysmal recovery rates from this.It is a lot like Zombies. Their behavior is very chaotic, and fueled by sexual exchanges.Many juveniles are involved.The city need to re-start the war on drugs. The alternative has not worked

  • julie98106 June 29, 2015 (9:18 pm)

    Research Meth addiction recovery rates- it’s not pretty.

  • evergreen June 29, 2015 (9:41 pm)

    I think it sounds great. It’s a temporary solution, yet a great way to get health and other resources to vulnerable populations. Hopefully they will also have a police force, especially since children of all ages live at these camps.

  • Mike June 29, 2015 (9:47 pm)

    How many ended up here by chance of ?
    There are more issues to homelessness than just giving people a place to live or a plot of land to camp on. Many are good individuals who ended up in a crap position not by their own doing (I believe miws is one particular person like this, he can speak more to his past scenario). There are many who actually thrive on the lifestyle and there are addicts and other people with various mental health issues, etc…
    I would rather our city/county/state and fed officials put money into addiction recovery, mental health care and work to live in a safe and clean environment than dumping money into stupid projects or overpaid contractors (see pretty much every SDOT and WSDOT project).
    For those that are not in dire need of mental health care or addiction recovery resources, I think we should demand the city land homeless capable of working, $15/hr jobs, create commune type apartments where people have a chore list to live rent free for 1 year. Provide adequate childcare for those working. Provide meals for those working and keeping up on chores within the commune. There’s no free hand out, you work for it, but you work to make a better life from it. If you can get on your feet faster and leave, awesome.
    I’d bet we’d see our city cleaned up. Those who want to work and make a better life are more likely to pick up garbage from those who are not and leave it.
    There’s no reason for our state to have a homelessness issue. We have the highest concentration of millionaires per capita in the nation and a large number of the worlds Billionaires here. The Gates foundation spends millions over seas while just out their back door (really… it’s their backdoor) are homeless.

  • Lonnie June 29, 2015 (10:02 pm)

    Regardless of where they decide to be locate the camps, the city should provide sewage and running water as well as garbage pickup in interest of public safety.

  • PSPS June 29, 2015 (10:12 pm)

    Utah practically eliminated homelessness by simply giving places to live for free and offering whatever support services people needed. It saved them a lot of money too. One of many articles about this is here:

    The linked article mentions Seattle as one place that tried this, yet I haven’t seen any mention of it.

    • WSB June 29, 2015 (10:20 pm)

      PSPS – “Housing First,” which the story mentions as Utah’s strategy, is the name of the philosophy/policy under which, for example, the DESC building in Delridge was built – just get people off the street, even if they are still drinking/drugging, and then get them services, etc. However, officials here have acknowledged that while they’ve thrown lots of money at the chronic problem of homelessness, we still have 3,000+ on King County streets (the tally from the most recent One-Night Count).

  • GOP in WS June 29, 2015 (11:07 pm)

    I second the idea of putting the encampment at the Terminal where the Shell Oil rig was.

  • Knowstoomuch June 29, 2015 (11:14 pm)

    For those of us that donated to these charities and know that the money was collected by multiple churches for same bills. We know about the abuse. Mayor has ignored repeated requests to tell his staff the bad. He only wants to collect taxes. Hand out money. Land. Redistribute the wealth.

  • cj June 30, 2015 (4:34 am)

    Not all homeless are the same. The Camps could work IF the city was controlling them. What we have had in the past was camps controlled by camp leaders who previously were ignoring the law and just plopping them selves down where ever they could find a space whether the city liked it or not. If we don’t make a way to aid and control the issue then those so called camp leaders will continue to take advantage of those with real issues. I have a relative who came up and got on a housing list while living with her sister last year. Turns out the person she talked to never put her on a list at all and 6 months later she had to start over. There are all kinds of scams going on involving money set aside for dealing with homelessness but much of its not going where it was originally intended. A little follow through would be great.

  • JoB June 30, 2015 (6:53 am)

    The problem is the same one that has reared it’s ugly head since Nickelsville parked at the bottom of the hill.. accountability… not just in funds but in stewardship.
    has everyone forgotten the flood at Nickelsville?
    Or the incident in which the portapotties were removed by management?
    i haven’t.
    i am all for a well run homeless encampment but not a re-run of the Scott and Peggy show.

  • ridiculous June 30, 2015 (7:02 am)

    This is a prime example of why City Light should be removed from the City Council’s control and restructured as a Public Utility District. The city already considers it a cash cow and uses it as a slush fund and lab for their vanity projects, but now they are forcing inappropriate land use on parcels that should be sold off for development to benefit the bottom line.

  • legitimate question June 30, 2015 (8:12 am)

    Why is utility land being used for this? If it’s surplus, why isn’t being sold for market value? Will the ratepayers be compensated for this dubious use of a surplussed public asset?

  • JoB June 30, 2015 (8:43 am)

    I just read the article on the encampment at Ballard which has been awarded to SHARE/WHEEL… in it they ask the city for more money for management and less oversight.
    my question.. How is it possible for SHARE/WHEEL to receive less oversight?
    this is from a friend’s email this morning
    there were many more items on her list but i have passed on only those of which i have personal knowledge
    “The city officials are on legal notice About the following”
    There are civil rights complaints by women including allegations of sexual assaults
    There are AG complaints about improper use of funds and lack of accountability of donated funds
    Camp residents are forced to protest
    use of scripted testimony for public presentations
    Jewelry and stolen ID in tents
    Deaths.. some overdoses
    Illegal ban on calling 911
    Donations of tents tarps food clothes Disappear
    donations recycled into the trash when a camper is barred from camp and can’t claim “their” items.
    I know the city is on notice of many of these violations and more because i have reported those i witnessed.
    Without true accountability, this experiment is doomed to failure.

  • AIDM June 30, 2015 (8:45 am)

    As far as West Seattle is concerned, this is less about “the problem of homelessness” and its solution and more about the rest of the city taking their fair share of the responsibility. Highland Park hosted Nickelsville for a ~2 years until the residents declared that it was overrun by drug addicts and there were several high profile cases requiring police intervention. Highland Park would be smart to fight its place on this list as a possible future site, so that some other neighborhoods in Seattle can take their fair share of the responsibility. It will be much, much easier to fight a place on a list now than later when people are moving in. Highland Park has other economic challenges to deal with before trying to tackle homelessness.

    We should tell the Mayor that we will consider hosting another homeless encampment after Highland Park Elementary becomes one of the top performing schools in the city and local unemployment drops below the 25th percentile for the city.

  • j June 30, 2015 (9:56 am)

    Please make sure people attending encampments are drug free and are residents of the State of Washington.
    How much is in the budget for dismantling the “outer encampments that pop up? Highland Park residents were promised the outer encampments would be removed. This happened once and even then all outer camps were not removed. Remember the King County employee that got stabbed?
    W Marginal greenbelt and greenbelt by 1st S bridge are still littered with illegal encampments to this day.
    What promises and commitments do we have to control the illegal outer encampments? KC said the outer encampments would be cleared and that did not happen then and continues not to happen currently.

    We are nowhere near Nicklesville (approx 4 miles) yet we noticed a SIGNIFICANT drop in cars and people creeping around in the middle of the night stealing when the encampment shifted to the central district.
    Anyone know how crime trends changed there?

    I fully support drug free “work to live” encampments. At least 10hrs community service per week picking up litter, painting overt graffiti and removing ivy would be a good start.
    I still have not heard a single story or comment about an encampment patron doing an ounce of community work and/or volunteering.

    I would sell my home if I was near one of these encampment sites. Very dangerous.

  • Alan June 30, 2015 (10:36 am)

    I would like to see the homeless taken care of. I do not believe dumping them in a muddy field without nearby services accomplishes that. It isn’t as if we need to wonder how that location would work, since we have already experienced it.

    Part of the problem with the location is that it is across the street from the city’s largest greenbelt. Those that are rejected by the camp, due to crimes or failure to follow rules, then have plenty of acreage to use. This is a much bigger concern to me than those in the camp.

    Were the city proposing a mixed-use development down there, to include services such as a grocery store, along with real housing for homeless, I would support that.

  • whatdoesitmatter June 30, 2015 (11:48 am)


    I agree with you. But at this point, I also understand that the location is a beautiful way for everybody to wash their hands of the problem. Out of sight out of mind. Unless you live nearby. Then very different.

    I believe that it does not and will not matter what the nearby residents want or don’t want. It won’t matter. At all. I have lived north of the invisible boundary which divides this classist city.

    I have been both sides now.

    It is time to go. I am out of fight.

    The story of homeless and needy humans is as old as humanity. There is no governance solution, so the powers that be move it as far away as possible. Where there is no power to fight back. The message being sent is clear. Nearby residents are irrelevant. City an NPO’s will be counting on little pushback because they know we are weakening because we are f-ing worn out from fighting.

    Call me compassionate the first time the homeless camp showed up. Call me tolerant the second time the home encampment of over 100 and hundreds more in the greenbelt showed up a few years later.

    Call me wiser now.

  • JoAnne June 30, 2015 (3:47 pm)

    So-called “compassionate” people seem to have a very short memory.
    At West Marginal Way, homeless services people visited each resident and offered to relocate them to an actual shelter (with a roof and bathrooms!). A huge proportion of them refused to move out of the tent city.
    Because they were meth-heads! Homeless shelters have rules, like you can’t use DRUGS!

  • WsEd June 30, 2015 (6:31 pm)

    SmokeyCretin said it in one word.

    Magnolia. When
    I see proposals for these in Magnolia, Madison Park, Inness Arden, Broadmoor ect. I will be on board.

    This will be Murry’s bag tax

  • JoB June 30, 2015 (7:31 pm)

    those offers for housing didn’t necessarily include keeping long term partners together.. not even husbands and wives..
    and didn’t include pets.
    and some of them were limited time offers
    some as short as overnight
    it’s easy to dismiss the homeless as “meth heads”
    but as it turns out
    not every homeless person is
    and some of those offers weren’t as golden as they sounded

  • Highland Park Resident of 38 years June 30, 2015 (9:05 pm)

    I have lived in Highland park for 38 years. I can tell you without a doubt that the full time that Nickelsville was at the bottom of our hill (Highland Park Way) There were many issues that have never existed in our area. Car bombing, huge amounts of prostitution, Meth addicts and dealers running through the neighborhoods etc.

    I built a house here and have been raising my kids and in the last two year stretch they were here I had two very scary and very major run in’s with Nickelsville residence and the people that come with it. I can tell you with out a doubt that the unsafe encounters my kids and family had to endure were a direct result of Nickelsville being a little less than a mile from my front door and sharing the greenbelt my house and yard are built on. When you have a meth head drive into your yard to dump something out of their truck because they missed the dead end of the street where they thought they were going to dump it or another one that passed out in your yard while your kids were playing out there you would not want them in your neighborhood either.

    These arguments that it is an industrial area not near a residential neighborhoods are ridiculous. What do you think these people do all day? I will tell you they walk around your neighborhood high and when they are not doing that they are at the local little stores asking for money or hanging out under the trees around the school and park doing drugs and drinking since they are not allowed to do it onsite.

    I really do feel bad for people that have mental and drug issues but that does not mean Highland Park should have this burden we have done our three years and it is not going to happen again! I will be back down at the Mayors office with the rest of the neighbors that don’t want to have this thrown on us again!

    These encampments are not a safe place for even Meth heads to live. They should not be allowed to continue centralizing it into one neighborhood location. However, if they feel the need to continue it, it better not be on Highland Park again or they are going to have a fight! Anyone that says none of what we experienced as a neighborhood and individuals is not what happens should ask to have some locations near their houses and greenbelts as locations we did our time unwillingly! I hope the Mayors office is reading these post as you can see the owners and residents of Highland Park are not happy about having to fight to have our safe neighborhood back over and over again.

  • JoB June 30, 2015 (10:49 pm)

    Highland Park Resident of 38 years..
    i have had illegal dumping in my alley.
    there are panhandlers outside my local stores.
    i woke one night to find someone emptying their bladder over the fence into my garden
    i live near Westwood Mall
    my friend lives near Admiral Junction and has the same problems.
    I have no doubt that the problems have gotten worse in your neighborhood in the last few years.
    So have the problems in mine.
    clearly, the policy of moving “the bums” on isn’t working.
    Perhaps we should be trying something that does..
    like housing.

  • Sportsmama July 1, 2015 (6:30 am)

    Reality is that MANY of us volunteered, donated, chauffeured, found resources. The management company was not transparent, not accountable, forbid social workers. Our donations did not get to the people. With years of knowledge of problems and city contracts with them ?

  • JoB July 1, 2015 (7:41 am)

    We really don’t have to demonize homeless people to agree that a back up pond that floods during high water events is not a good place for a tent city for the homeless…
    or that the people who shot down every attempt to create services for that camp are not the best stewards of a publicly funded camp.

  • JoAnne July 1, 2015 (8:54 am)

    To anyone who feels obligated to keep providing more and more funds and services for “Freeattle:”
    This is YOUR personal choice, and you should use YOUR personal resources to deal with it.
    Leave the rest of us out of it! We have paid enough, and it is NOT WORKING. Giving aid does NOT reduce homelessness.
    In fact, the more tolerant we are, and the more we give, the worse it gets! More homeless people come here and more people decide to mooch.
    It’s never going to end. And WE ARE DONE.

  • Highland Park Resident of 38 years July 1, 2015 (10:49 am)

    JoB, You are incorrect our issues were directly related to Nickelsville and its residence and the other people it brings. As I said we live just up the hill our yard connects to the greenbelt. I confirmed with the each of the people that we had an issue with and the police each time and they were residence of nickelsville and on Meth. Straight out of their mouth (not random people coming into the area to do things). For all the years prior to Nickelsville the street I grew up on and the street where I built a house never had those types of problems as there is nothing that would draw them to our neighborhood like maybe the stores in Westwood near you. As soon as it was removed from our neighborhood the issues went away as well. They were constant during both the one year stretch and the two year stretch.

    Plain and simple Highland Park has done it’s three years of dealing with the city’s problem. If people wish to place them all into one area they need to do it someplace else. The city has proven it can’t manage it nor keep the drug users, alcoholics, nor dealers out. Nor can they solve the problem or it would have been solved years ago. So putting 100+ homeless people and the extra 50+ or more that follows it and lives near it is not going back in Highland Park. Why should our safety and the safety of our kids be impacted further by the city’s choices to burden one neighborhood with the full city’s problem.

    Also I agree with others in this comment section that the funds they are using for this crazy plan should be used to support and help Highland Park School so it is not the lowest ranked school in the city. I pay the same amount of taxes as everyone else in Seattle and then I also have to pay for private school for my three kids because the city wants to focus placing a homeless encampment in my neighborhood rather than make the school a better place for our kids. This is my last post as I need to focus my time on letters to the city officials rather than debating my dealings that were directly related to this encampment being placed next to my house. I would encourage anyone else that does not want to see Highland Park on the list to start the same now before they allow them back!

  • Paul July 1, 2015 (12:42 pm)

    WSB – A more direct source dispelling the myth might be in order. Real Change clearly has incentive to spin the topic in a way that aligns with their perception and values. I looked for the referenced Seattle’s Human Services Department study but was not able to find it.

    • WSB July 1, 2015 (12:57 pm)

      I have seen that cited elsewhere and this is just where I found it; you can doubt it if you want, but Real Change News is produced by award-winning journalists (they tend to clean up at the regional Society of Professional Journalists awards, an organization that also has honored our work a few times), and I trust their work wholeheartedly. – Tracy

  • JoB July 1, 2015 (2:39 pm)

    Highland Park Resident of 28 years
    what i am trying to tell you is that Highland Park is not the only area of West Seattle that has taken the brunt of public policy that prioritizes criminalization over housing for the homeless.
    if people weren’t driven out of more convenient safer places to live into the green belt the homeless population of the greenbelt wouldn’t be causing you a problem.. would they?
    Not in my back yard won’t fix the problem..
    only a change in policy will.

  • William July 1, 2015 (3:13 pm)

    TERMINAL 5!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! With web cams and a front gate for curfews

  • JoB July 1, 2015 (4:23 pm)

    now that’s a thought ;-)

  • JOE July 2, 2015 (8:47 pm)

    Ballard at the Locks…..
    Why not on Cap Hill ?

Sorry, comment time is over.