Tim Burgess' City View

Do You Want Tent Encampments Almost Everywhere in Seattle?

A shorter version of this article was first published in The Seattle Times earlier this afternoon.

 

Three Seattle City Council members — Tammy Morales, Teresa Mosqueda, Kshama Sawant — want to permit tent encampments almost everywhere citywide.

 

This ill-conceived, very dangerous legislation (Council Bill 119796) would effectively allow camping across Seattle — including on sidewalks (if campers leave a 4-foot accessible pathway), planting strips, parks, open spaces and industrial lands.

 

Astonishingly, the council members even want to block police officers from removing encampments when someone calls police seeking removal of campers.

 

Bill Gates Warned Us. Will We Finally Heed His Advice

While we are hunkered down at home, I’ve been thinking about why our country wasn’t at all prepared for this respiratory pandemic that is sweeping the globe.

 

Not being prepared is going to cost us a lot in human and economic costs. We've already seen how very painful and disruptive the coronavirus is going to be; it will be even more so if we minimize the counsel of scientists and public health experts.

 

Last night, I watched Bill Gates as he was interviewed by Anderson Cooper and Dr. Sanjay Gupta on CNN. I learned that Gates warned us five years ago, in April 2015, that the United States—frankly, the whole world—was not prepared at all for a respiratory virus like we are experiencing today.

 

Here’s Bill Gates issuing his warning back in 2015 and his 5-step solution. The video runs just over 8 minutes. It's worth the time, for certain.

During last night’s CNN interview, Gates acknowledged that none of his 2015 recommendations have been fully implemented.

 

Why is this? Why is it so difficult for us to implement systems that will protect us?

 

In Gates’ analysis, the closest system to the public health response capability he has advocated is the military—they train, stage war games, have reserves that can be quickly mobilized, use technology wisely, and are constantly assessing system weaknesses and threats to our national security. Gates would like our public health system to do the same.

 

I guess we shouldn't be surprised at system failures. They are all around us, especially in government systems (or lack of them). Take the threat of climate change. Our response has been piecemeal, scattered, and inadequate. Take poverty. We have designed multiple programs to eliminate poverty, and spent billions, yet intergenerational poverty persists and families wanting help must navigate a confusing system labyrinth that most of us would give up on very quickly. Take education. We have failed to prepare many of our children for today's global economy, especially black and brown children, and education inequality rages on. Take criminal justice. We have been very slow to adopt reforms that could bring less crime and less punishment. Take homelessness. We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in our region in recent years to solve the crisis of unsheltered people and yet haven't seemed to have made a dent.

 

On top of these failures—and, I'm sure, there are many others—we have allowed what I call a "peanut butter philosophy of politics" to reign supreme, causing great harm to the common good. This "peanut butter" style of governing spreads resources too thin, placing emphasis on keeping everyone happy and diluting any opposition to a given approach or program. So, rather than investing deeply to achieve significant change, we spread our investments—like thinly spreading peanut butter—across multiple programs and organizations, lessening the overall impact. Instead, we should carefully follow the science of what works, invest deeply in those proven approaches, and achieve much greater impact.

 

Here's an example. We know from nearly 50 years of academic research that high-quality preschool for three- and four-year old children can change a child's life outcomes—better education attainment, better health, higher earning power when entering the adult workforce, less criminal justice system involvement. We all would welcome these positive outcomes. Yet, in Washington state we invest only about 1 percent of our state budget in early learning programs. Washington ranks in the lower third of states in access to quality early learning programs. (Former State Representative Ruth Kagi and I wrote about the all important birth-to-five years in this piece in the Puget Sound Business Journal.)

 

Researchers at the University of Chicago, and others, have documented that investing in high-quality early learning efforts is the most important and best investment we can make for our children. Last year, these same researchers documented that these investments can eliminate intergenerational poverty. Who wouldn't want these outcomes? And, yet, we don't make the level of investment that's needed. That's because competing demands obscure our focus on achieving the greatest impact, so we invest thinly—spreading the peanut butter—and allow inequity to march on.

 

The challenge of spreading the peanut butter isn't about right and wrong, good ideas or bad. It's about the rigor of investing to achieve the greatest return, being keenly focused on the desired outcomes, and having the ability to say "no" to other good but less effective ideas. It's about elected leaders leading and insisting on accountability.

 

Bill Gates recognized a problem many years ago that we are now living through. He suggested practical steps to get ready. We didn't act as we should have. Let's not do the same with the other pressing social and political problems staring us in the face, especially those where we know what to do but can't seem to act effectively.

University District Rezone Adopted by Council

Tuesday afternoon, the Council unanimously approved the U District rezone which is part of the city government’s effort to increase density and housing affordability in our urban centers and villages, such as the U District. I voted in favor of this legislation for the following reasons:

Creating More Affordable Housing: The Right and Wrong Way

UPDATE to the post below: On Wednesday, the Council's Budget Committee voted 7-2 (Juarez and myself opposed) to use debt financing of $29 million dollars to build affordable housing in the city. As I argue below, this is a very bad decision. The Council will take a final vote on this matter on Monday, November 21 at 2 p.m.

Seattle city government is on a path to create 20,000 affordable housing units over the next 10 years, the biggest surge in the supply of affordable housing we’ve ever seen in Seattle.

To accomplish this ambitious goal, we placed a measure on the August 2016 ballot that renewed and doubled the city’s affordable housing tax levy. Seattle voters approved this tax increase by 71 percent, a strong affirmation of Seattle’s commitment to caring for our most vulnerable neighbors. This tax will raise $290,000,000 for rental housing development and preservation, home-ownership assistance, homelessness prevention, and housing stability services. 

We adopted new laws that require every builder of commercial office space and multi-family housing (e.g. apartments, condominiums) to directly contribute funds to building affordable housing or to build units on their own. This mandatory affordable housing requirement is unprecedented for Seattle.

Homeless Encampments: A Better Solution

Last night, I joined Mayor Murray, and Councilmembers Bagshaw and Juarez in announcing a much better solution to the challenges of ad hoc camp sites popping up across Seattle.

Here’s a very brief outline of what we announced:

1. City government will open up to four new authorized encampments similar to those already operating in Ballard, Interbay and at Othello in southeast Seattle. At least one of these encampments will be managed as a low-barrier facility, meaning individuals will not be automatically excluded because of chemical addiction, mental health issues or other typical barriers. While not a perfect solution, these organized and well-managed encampments are much better than ad hoc encampments in our parks, greenbelts or city sidewalks.
   
   
2. City government will increase street outreach and improve our approach. Outreach teams will prioritize moving people off the street and to safe indoor locations, including emergency shelter, rapid re-housing services, and permanent housing.
3. Ad hoc camp removal protocols will be changed to reflect a triage approach. Camp sites in parks or on sidewalks will still not be allowed and will be subject to immediate removal, as will sites where violence and serious criminal behavior is occurring. Other sites will only be removed if shelter or housing services are offered and declined. This triaging reflects a humane and balanced approach that allows us to appropriately address public health and safety concerns while recognizing that some ad hoc camping is likely to continue until the city addresses the necessary long-term fixes to our homelessness response.
4. Focus on housing first, a practical approach that began in Seattle many years ago that acknowledges that the best first step is to get people housed with minimal conditions or barriers. King County, United Way, All Home and city government have agreed to new strategic principles that emphasize the housing-first approach. Everything we do should be focused on moving people from the street into a warm, safe place.

The Mayor has indicated that he will provide more specific details to Council next week.

Homeless Encampments: An Update

It has been four weeks since my colleagues’ introduced legislation that would create a right to camp on public property throughout the city. I opposed introduction of this legislation.

This photograph was taken last Friday at University Playground on Northeast 50th Street. This particular park includes a children's playground, a tennis court and a sports field. This is not uncommon in city parks and playgrounds.

In this update, I want tell you what’s happened since, why it is so important for the people of Seattle to remain keenly engaged in the discussion, and efforts to change this legislation. This update gives my perspective on three important issues surrounding this proposed new law.

1. How this legislation will impact you, your family, and neighbors.
    
2. The elephant in the room that’s being ignored.
    
3. A much better solution.

The Impact on You, Your Family and Neighbors

As introduced on September 6, the proposed law establishes a new right to camp on public property across Seattle, including in our parks and greenbelts, and on sidewalks and planting strips. The law mandates that city government make public spaces available for camping in tents or vehicles. It creates complicated rules and processes that must be followed before anyone can be removed from a camping site. If anyone is removed, the city government must provide “adequate and accessible” long-term housing. Finally, if any of this process is violated, the proposed law establishes a $250 penalty per violation to be paid to the individual camper by city taxpayers.
 
Needless to say, this new law is not the balanced approach we all deserve, an approach that weighs and balances compassion with our public health and safety

Homeless Encampments: What Do You Think?

The City Council voted Tuesday afternoon to begin considering legislation (Council Bill 118794) that would, in my view, establish a new right for people struggling with homelessness to camp in tents or vehicles on public property across Seattle.

What do you think? Should the city government allow homeless camping throughout the city? Or, should we concentrate these campers in officially recognized and managed encampments at specific locations? Or, should we dramatically change our overall approach to homeless as I suggested in this August 5 opinion piece published in The Seattle Times?

My colleagues and I need to hear your opinion on these issues. Keep reading and you’ll find a link to each Councilmember’s and the Mayor’s email below.

I voted against the ordinance introduced on Tuesday and here’s why.

The proposed ordinance is not the balanced approach the people of Seattle deserve, an approach that carefully weighs and balances compassion with our public health and safety obligations. This ordinance tips this balance decidedly away from our public health and safety responsibilities and will do nothing to move people from homelessness to safe and appropriate housing.

As written, the ordinance essentially establishes for the first time a new right to camp in tents or vehicles on public space throughout the city, including in our parks and greenbelts, and on city sidewalks and planting strips. It defines “public space” as “any area that is

Short Term Rental Regulations: Details and Next Steps

Last week Mayor Murray and I announced proposed regulations for short term rentals. We have taken a balanced approach that recognizes the benefits platforms like Airbnb or VRBO create for Seattle residents, while also attempting to curb the growing commercialization of this industry. At a time where long-term housing is hard to come by, we want to encourage owners of multiple properties to make their properties available to long-term residents.

My Affordable Housing, Neighborhoods and Finance Committee will receive an introductory briefing about this proposal on Wednesday, June 15. We will dive into the details in July.

For those wondering what this means for you, here are a few highlights:

• If you operate a short term rental out of your primary residence (including a connected in-law apartment or backyard cottage), you will be able operate all year long. This allows considerably more flexibility than the regulations in many other cities, which often include a hard cap on the total number of nights.
• If you operate a short term rental in a property that is not your primary residence, you cannot operate year-round; you will be limited at 90 nights a year. This limitation will provide a financial incentive for property owners to move these units back to the long-term market, making Seattle housing available for Seattleites.
• For those who operate past 90 nights in your primary residence, you will need to go online and secure a new regulatory license.
• Overall, these are very modest regulations: we estimate about 80% of short term rental operators will see no new regulations at all under this proposal.

Full Council To Vote on Housing Levy Today

This afternoon the Full Council will vote on an ordinance that would send a $290 million Housing Levy to voters for consideration on the August 2, 2016 Primary Election ballot. If approved, the seven-year Housing Levy will serve as the largest investment in affordable housing the City has ever made. The Housing Levy proposal focuses on increasing affordable housing production and preservation, supporting homelessness prevention, and fostering home ownership for low-income residents. 

Since 1981, Seattle has chosen to generously invest in affordable housing for our neighbors, with a particular emphasis on those most in need. This year, the Council and Mayor have thoroughly analyzed and crafted a package that will provide affordable housing for thousands of Seattle residents.

After receiving the Mayor’s draft proposal in March, Council made several amendments that would:

• Allow levy funds to provide a grant or low interest loan to an owner of existing multifamily housing to make building improvements in exchange for putting rent restrictions on a certain percentage of units in the building;
• Allow for up to $30 million of levy funds to be used as short-term loans for acquisition and preservation of existing affordable housing; and
• Dedicate an additional $1.75 million toward homelessness prevention and housing stability services using interest earnings generated from levy proceeds. 

The Council’s amendments work within the existing funds of the $290 million proposed levy submitted to the Council by the Mayor.

Apply for Affordable Housing Community Focus Groups

There are 10 days left to apply to be on the Community Focus Groups that will help guide the citywide conversation around the Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda (HALA).

Applications are available here. This link also includes some FAQ, which I’ve pasted below. The application deadline is Friday, February 26 at 8 pm.

If this sort of thing isn't for you, the focus groups are not the only way to provide input on how HALA proposals best fit into neighborhoods. Throughout 2016 and 2017, the City will host neighborhood meetings, open houses, telephone town halls, and other engagement opportunities for community feedback (click here for a timeline of engagement activities).

What is the purpose of the HALA Community Focus Groups?