Back on January 30, I wrote that persons who had been camped out on the Burke Gilman Trail between Gasworks Park and I-5 had, effectively, been served with an eviction notice. As some readers noted in the comments, the city followed through with that eviction. Just weeks later however, campers returned.
Nathan dropped us a line:
I was wondering if you can do a follow up to the Burke Gilman Trail homeless population since everything is “back to normal.” Between Stoneway and I-5 all of the tents have appeared back in the same locations. Yesterday morning I saw more of the same, including grocery carts, a dead rat, and trash beginning to accumulate.
I was certainly aware of their return since I bike this stretch of trail quite regularly. I might add that among the paraphernalia were a few bicycles and a barbecue. To facilitate access to the bike path from the tents, someone had cut a hole in the chain link fence as well.
Removal of such camps has often been fraught with difficulties especially with regards to campers’ possessions. It is not primarily the campers themselves that most citizens object to though, but rather the copious amounts of trash associated with these camps.
Remarks Nathan:
I was impressed with the camper nearest to Stone Way. I saw him shoveling out several walkways to his tent and a trash bin is onsite. I think I’m bothered more by the litter than the down on their luck campers. I’ve seen volunteers host litter pick ups in this area but they seem a waste of time.
While neighborhoods are not equally affected by the homeless population, the problem impacts most every resident of Seattle in one way or another. A January, 2016, survey of the homeless population pegs the number at 2942. A more recent city survey breaks down that population based upon place of origin (about 75% from King County, about 13% out-of-state), reason for being homeless, and other factors. A very detailed report on this survey appears at My Northwest, but was also reported on briefly in the Seattle Times.
Could help be on the way? The Mayor has proposed a $55 million per year property tax levy to address the problem. (Details on how this money would be spent are still TBD, I believe.) This is in addition to numerous city programs such as Pathways Home (which seeks to find transitional and permanent housing for the homeless), and approximately $50 million already in city coffers allocated to homeless issues.
In the meantime, what’s a citizen to do? Rather than sitting around waiting for the city to locate camps, contact the residents, and clean up after them, it is possible to initiate a request yourself. Requests can be made via an online service request form, by using the Find-It-Fix-It mobile app or by calling 206-684-2489.
You may find the response somewhat underwhelming. Nathan reported the newest BGT campers, and here is the response he received back:
I am replying to your inquiry about unauthorized encampments. You asked why “regular sweeping” isn’t done as “periodical sweeping” has not worked. The reality is the city has resource limits (staffing, equipment, funding) and hundreds of campsites city-wide, which is why Mayor Murray proclaimed a state of emergency regarding homelessness.
The city continues to strategize and try new approaches to improving and resolving this issue. The city has recently renewed its focus on trash removal so hope you will see an improvement in the near future. Thank you for contacting the Customer Service Bureau.
If we can be of further assistance in this matter, please [send an email to [email protected]] and send us a message. Please do not change the subject line.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Brush
City of Seattle
Customer Service Bureau
(206) 684-CITY(2489)
You’re really surprised? Of course they are back. And they’ll be moved again and come back again. And again. Meanwhile, you’ll vote for Mayor Murray’s doubling of money we spend on homeless services. Then they’ll camp on the BGT, get moved, and come back again. And again. Then you’ll vote for another property tax levy for homeless services. Then they’ll camp on the BGT, get moved, and come back again. And again. Then you’ll vote for another property tax levy for homeless services. Then they’ll camp on the BGT, get moved, and come back again. And again. Then you’ll vote for another property tax levy for homeless services. Then they’ll camp on the BGT, get moved, and come back again. And again. Then you’ll vote for another property tax levy for homeless services. Then they’ll camp on the BGT, get moved, and come back again. And again. Then you’ll vote for another property tax levy for homeless services.
Bravo, Marie.
Murray and Sawant are encouraging homeless to come to Seattle. The most basic reason for government is to provide public safety. Safety includes sanitation. Murray has hired more than 1000 new employees at our expense. Now he wants to reinforce campers by allowing them to live in front of our houses. Why are our taxes not being used for cleanup instead of paper pushers at City Hall??
I think the survey results pretty much showed that homeless are NOT coming here in droves. The notable majority became homeless whilst living here in King County…though many did come here from elsewhere before becoming homeless — which accords with the general population…I am an import, too!
The survey results are bunk. It was commissioned by the same people more tax dollars for their services to “help” the homeless.
There was no independent verification of the study and its results. The people who did the study probably would take at face value every homeless person who claimed they’re a veteran. And when they list their last known address as the ZIP code where Pioneer Square is, that doesn’t count as being from Seattle.
Isn’t only 40% of the King County residents are born in the Washington state?
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/newcomers-pour-into-king-county-while-washingtonians-quietly-exit/
It’s not just the majority of the homeless guys are from out of state. The majority of the people in general are from out of state.
The survey methodology for local vs out of state and is super faulty.So faulty in fact it seems like it was almost designed that way.
“The majority of the people in general are from out of state.”
Yes, and? So therefore concern about where the homeless are flocking here from is irrelevant? Is that the argument you’re trying to make? Are you incapable of grasping the concept that Seattle being thought of as a destination city for junkies and criminals is becoming a huge problem?
Last I checked, the rest of the people who are moving here from out of state to be responsible law-abiding adults aren’t costing the city well over a hundred million dollars a year in direct costs on homeless services, with no improvements to be seen for that investment. When Mayor Murray’s latest tax increase goes through and we know it will, we’re going to be spending an average of about $34,000 a year on each homeless person in this city. Do you actually believe we’ll see any positive results for that money? The focus has been all about wanting to seem “compassionate” to them instead of actually getting rid of the problem.
And last I checked, the rest of the people who are moving here aren’t leaving mountains of garbage everywhere they go and breaking into everyone’s cars and homes and assaulting people to anywhere near the degree that these junkies and criminals in the encampments have been. Seattle is a magnet for this element because we allow them to camp wherever they please and engage in all manner of criminal and anti-social activity. The ones that genuinely want out of the homeless lifestyle will seek help, and we should continue to offer and provide it for them. But for the rest of them, we should eliminate all these illegal tent encampments, start enforcing the law, and make it impossible for them to get settled in any one place. Eventually the problem will start to go away.
The concern of homeless people flocking from elsewhere is a common
urban legend that’s believed in every city with homeless problems. It’s
the same as the idea of immigrants are terrorists and criminals: it’s
very attractive for people to believe the problems are generated by
others elsewhere. Those ideas are really just a way for people to blame
issues on others and avoid solutions.
Yes, I do believe the city
isn’t really having a good way of solving the problem. The issue is that
the city is trying to please too many different people at the same
time.
And I’ve said many many times to you before: the attitude of
helping only those “deserving” and “willing to be helped” is a big
problem and the reason for more problems. That line of thinking has been
the major cause of why Indiana suffered overdose fatality issue
severely under Pence. The ones that like the most help by default are
the ones that least deserving and the ones that resist help the most.
And you need to be specific about what kind of law you’d want to
enforce. Imprisonment? What’s the way to make it impossible for them to
get settled? Why would they need to be settled actually?
“homeless people flocking from elsewhere is a common
urban legend?”
TJ, Seattle has the third highest population in the country. Only New York and LA have more, and those cities are far larger than Seattle. Furthermore, homeless numbers are actually in decline nationwide. In Seattle, their numbers are growing, and significantly so. So why do you suppose we have such a disproportionately high number of homeless here? They come here for a reason, and if you believe that’s an urban legend, then you’re in denial.
And if some of them refuse help and shelter, well what the hell else are we supposed to do? Just throw up our hands and say OK, you don’t like rules, you want to be left alone to camp and live as you please, regardless of your impact on the community?
No. That is not acceptable. These encampments are notoriously dangerous and unsanitary places. And it’s only a matter of time until we get some nasty plague brewing in them from all the rats. You don’t necessarily need to imprison them, unless they’re the kind of scumbags like those who held a half dozen young teenage girls hostage and raped and pimped them out. Sorry, I really don’t care about treating those guys with compassion, I’m all tapped out here.
As I’ve said, you don’t let them settle in any one spot. If they prefer sleeping in their own shit with thousands of rats and needles everywhere instead of an actual shelter, then we need to make camping so difficult that they rethink that option. Anytime a tent pops up, roust them. Don’t even give them any warning that their camp will be swept in a week or whenever. They are there illegally anyway, they’re not entitled to a warning. Sweep them, and make them move their crap night after night, until it becomes too much for them. Tell them, we’re going to keep making you move, or you can come with us now to get detoxed and sheltered. Of course, Murray needs to hire more cops to make that happen, but one can hope, right?
Next time KUOW, KIRO, Crosscut, etc interview a homeless-by-choice person who gives their name, and the name is fairly unique, take a couple minutes to look up their facebook page. I’ve found something like 75-80% readily admit they came here from New York, Texas, Arizona, etc in RECENT years.
And whenever the person being interviewed is asked why they came to Seattle, it’s almost always one of two reasons: 1) the generous population that gives them anything they need; or, 2) they came here for a “new start” yet…. SURPRISE…. nothing is new when you continue to base your life on drugs, excuses and lies.
Let’s hope that those from the warm states will decide that living in a tent for 4 months of rain isn’t worth it.
You feel as though it’s a legend, yet you cannot cite a single (real) study that debunks the legend.
Makes sense.
Comparing immigrants and refugees to traveling inginenous drug addicts the way you did is really quite disturbing in my view. I believe we need WAY MORE immigrants who don’t take our generosity for granted. And we need way more hard working refugees to counter-balance the lazy, high, entitled American sloths created my mindless compassion and an aggressive welfare state; we’ve arrived at a point where services and resources are constantly offered to people who don’t deserve them and mostly don’t even want them
I think there was a time when many of the people who live on the street were actually from here. But thanks to our (clueless) extra-generous city, we are now attracting them in droves.
The recent McStudy Marie cites was not scientific. Instead, it was yet another propaganda tool used to propagate the endless string of failed policies and emotion and ideologically-driven activists looking to “empower” homelessness rather than diminish it.
Simon Fraser University in Vancouver did an ACTUAL scientific study last year which confirmed what most of us who aren’t blinded by faux compassion already knew: over half of Downtown BC’s homeless-by-choice population were recent transplants from outside the province, a figure which had TRIPLED in the past decade. A decade which featured much higher spending on homeless programs which the study showed actually made people’s lives worse.
Imagine that: actually trying to study a problem before throwing hundreds more millions of dollars at it.
You are not using the Simon Fraser University study correctly. What they said is that there is an increase from 17% to 52% of the homeless population in a specific downtown region to be from outside Vancouver. How is that a proof of what you are trying to claim?
The study stated that homeless people concentrated due to financial assistance provided, and other factors appeared to be weak. What’s the equivalent financial assistance in Seattle that you think are the factor for attracting homeless people?
Don’t play the fact/study card so carelessly, when your point is to have facts and better studies.
Also the number of “triple” might sound scary, but really you should look closer where the increase are from. It’s from other parts of the province. Only 20% overall are from outside BC.
I see what you did there: you’re using the same strategy as Seattle’s McStudy to try and count “the most recent place” somebody lived when they last “became homeless”. You guys are afraid to ask and consider the questions that really count, because you know as well as the rest of us what’s really going on here.
I don’t really believe any numbers the city of the Seattle Times reports because to begin with they are self-reported numbers Why would a meth-head or junkie want to say that they are from Michigan or wherever and that they are addicts? Most will want to say that they got to the camps through no fault of their own. It’s only human nature to blame your ill fortune on someone else.
The last Seattle Times story I read, a few days ago (March 1-7?) gave a 50% number on out of state and 50% for addicts and mental problems. I think it was an editorial which also made a very good point about why is it that Seattle taxpayers are required to pay for the vast majority. There are homeless all around King County and no other city per capita-wise is sharing the burden. It’s Murray and his “compassionate” minions that are attracting the numbers, in my view. This is something for the state legislature to take up. But, of course, the eastern Washington farmers already hate Seattle and have done for decades.
“Down on their luck campers”
Are you kidding me? This is a GREAT time to be an able-bodied excuse-generating vagabond addict in Seattle: the drugs are cheap, and the clueless wealthy residents hand out $5 bills and just about anything else that can be converted into cash for drugs.
Against our better judgment, we also pay tens of thousands of tax dollars to make sure that these professional moochers can continue lying about their situations to hapless “compassionate” Seattleites on their pathway to self-destruction.
How much, exactly, is this generous assistance? Have heard it’s around $250 a month –
I believe once Murray’s latest proposal to show our “compassion” will bring the figure to about $34,000 per urban camper per year. What do you suppose the odds are we’ll get a good ROI on that?
Do you have a link to that? And is that an estimate of costs, rather than funds disbursed?
It’s an estimate of what’s been budgeted for. And I’m going to go out on a limb here and say it’s a safe bet they spent every penny, because when has the city ever showed restraint? Pronto!, anyone? They just haven’t spent it on programs that are actually effective in reducing the homeless problem.
It’s hard to nail down the exact figures, but most reports I’ve read state we currently spend not $50 million/year as stated in this article, but about $62 million/year, because Murray recently added $12 million to the $50 million. Add another $55 million to that and you get $117 million/year, and divide that by the January 2016 count of 3000 homeless and you get about 39,000 a year per individual.
This Seattle Times article puts the total at $115M /year:
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/superwealthy-seattle-entrepreneur-pushing-property-tax-to-battle-homelessness/
But then I’ve also read it’s as high as $180 million/year:
Housing levy: $29M
2017 homeless budget: $62M
City Council homeless loan: $29M
Interest on the loan: $25M
Mayor’s new levy: $55M
A recent KIRO article puts it at $105M:
http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/watch-mayor-murray-expected-to-announce-how-city-would-use-new-funds-for-homeless/500851755
Thanks for adding these well-sourced estimates! It’s important to note that the estimate I gave is from a city source.
I don’t care about the Burke Gilman people, or rather I do, but I also don’t feel good about hassling people who’re so far, no hurting anyone, but I DO strenuously object to that camp being next to John Stanford. This morning a homeless dude was defecating in the grass in plain view of parents and children, and they are openly using and dealing there and north on 5th Avenue NE.
Careful, the ACLU will tell you he has a civil right to do that.
Citation for that claim please?
Google “seattle aclu homeless ordinance.” The ACLU drafted it. Briefly, it would have legalized urban camping in parks, under bridges, pretty much anywhere there’s public land. Nevermind that these camps are covered with human waste, needles, and rats. The ACLU and the rest of the homeless activists tell us we’re not being “compassionate” if we don’t allow them to camp in these places.
Not only that, but the city would have been forced to pay the addicts and criminals who live that lifestyle $250 every time the city violated their “right” to camp wherever they please if they didn’t jump through a bunch of bureaucratic hoops properly to remove campers in unsafe places. And to think Ed Murray claims this is not “Freeattle.”
Thank god the city council backed off this latest bit of lunacy because of overwhelming public outcry from citizens who are fed up seeing their city become a trash heap and a magnet for junkies.
I am not finding support for your assertion that the ACLU claims individuals “have a civil right” to defecate, and use and sell controlled substances in public in proximity to a school.
You’re playing coy with me, right? Or do I actually have to spell it out for you? Do you think the ACLU is oblivious to what goes on in these camps?
That is actually the usual dilemma: just like we have to give drug-users clean needles for free if we want them to use clean needles, the solution to homeless camp trash and sanitary problems is to provide them free service of those, maybe by paying some of the homeless guys to do the cleaning jobs and such. However, many people would be against providing any services to those due to morality issues. So the problem remain unresolved.
Those things have been provided to other encampments and they don’t use them. Well, the porta potties get used, but not for the, ahem, intended purpose.
Not playing coy. As one that generally supports the ACLU I wanted to see if what you were saying about them was true. Sounds like it is not. Thanks for the clarification.
The ACLU wants the campers to be legally allowed to camp by places like JSIS. So where do you think the campers are going to the bathroom and doing their drugs?
But you’re right, everything I’ve alleged about the ACLU’s homeless policies and agenda must be wrong. The campers don’t create any problems where they camp, do they. So now that we’ve established that, when can we look forward to the ACLU and their members stepping up and offering these harmless souls a couch or bed for the night in their own home?
Mike O’Brien has expressed that notion on several occasions: he’s stated emphatically that homeless people have a right to deficate and dump garbage in public areas because “by definition” they don’t have any other options. Of course, O’Brien doesn’t mention that 80-90% of those so-called homeless people have refused services and WANT to be left alone and remain homeless. But that is just a minor detail when you’re out there trying to fight capitalism and “inequity”
I did see park officials with truck on Burke Gilman this morning near BBQ grill. Maybe enough people contacted the City where they felt compelled to act. They said they have started process to remove camps but that it takes a lot of steps due to the City system. Today they are “taking pictures.” This young employee seemed frustrated with the cumbersome process for them to remove camps. He also surprised me when he said he didn’t think most of these people were from the area. Apparently he didn’t read the survey memo. Nathan.
This mayor seems like a bit of puss if you ask me. How about a real person challenges you and speaks for the taxpayers and people who are making homes, families, and lives here. Wall up the areas under the highways and if the homeless move to the streets lock them up.