3 ms·

This is pure propaganda. There are SO many plans that many different local organizations are offering. Powerful companies who can communicate one single messag

This is pure propaganda. There are SO many plans that many different local organizations are offering. Powerful companies who can communicate one single message backed by advertising/public appearances/media can make it appear that are no other "real" options. This is a deliberate political strategy. The reality is that there are an enormous amount of "real" options. But political will is hard to muster when there are many competing ideas as to what should be done. Without a doubt gentrification, homelessness, and housing/rental prices can all be addressed from many directions. I have my own ideas about what can be done by the city, state, and country. To say "there was no plan, period" is literal propaganda that exists to support the status quo.

xapata 8y ago
You're right, that was disingenuous. I should have said that the council doesn't seem to be changing it's plans despite how ineffective they have been. Maybe it's an implementation problem instead of a planning problem. I'm extremely frustrated by the seeming tolerance for literal shit in the streets. At least put some porta-potties out for public health. If it only costs $300k for laundry, showers, toilets, and sinks (according to the plan linked in the other comment) why hasn't it been done yet?
- electricEmu 8y ago
  > I should have said that the council doesn't seem to be changing it's plans despite how ineffective they have been. That's funny xapata. The Seattle City Council has been implementing recommendations from the Poppe report [0]. The Poppe report lays out a homelessness action plan recommendations for Seattle. The head tax was to fund some of those recommendations from the Poppe report. The Seattle Times recently covered the homelessness count [1]. It explicitly mentioned that actions Seattle has taken to combat homelessness were having a positive effect. > Compared to more rapid rises in homeless counts over the past five years, a slower 4 percent increase represents progress, said Kyra Zylstra, interim director of All Home, the county’s homelessness coordinating agency, which organizes the yearly count. > “It’s not the kind of progress we all want to see,” Zylstra said. “But our performance data shows that the resources that we are investing in are housing people faster.” The whole point of the head tax was to continue funding recommendations from the Poppe report. They're the same recommendations that are demonstrated to be working. [0] https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/pathwayshome/BPA.pdf https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/pathwayshome/B... [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/new-homeless-count-in-king-county-shows-spike-in-number-of-people-sleeping-outside/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/new-homel...
  - xapata 8y ago
    I've participated in one-night homeless counts before, such as the once cited for that news article. I don't find the evidence of improvement compelling. If this Poppe report was the purpose of the tax, why was all the messaging "Tax Amazon!" instead of, "We need money for urgent projects!"? Despite being 70 pages, that report was quite vague. Mostly platitudes like, "Prioritize the most vulnerable!" I hope the plans were more detailed elsewhere. And how much did that report cost?

xapata 8y ago

You're right, that was disingenuous. I should have said that the council doesn't seem to be changing it's plans despite how ineffective they have been. Maybe it's an implementation problem instead of a planning problem. I'm extremely frustrated by the seeming tolerance for literal shit in the streets. At least put some porta-potties out for public health. If it only costs $300k for laundry, showers, toilets, and sinks (according to the plan linked in the other comment) why hasn't it been done yet?

electricEmu 8y ago
> I should have said that the council doesn't seem to be changing it's plans despite how ineffective they have been. That's funny xapata. The Seattle City Council has been implementing recommendations from the Poppe report [0]. The Poppe report lays out a homelessness action plan recommendations for Seattle. The head tax was to fund some of those recommendations from the Poppe report. The Seattle Times recently covered the homelessness count [1]. It explicitly mentioned that actions Seattle has taken to combat homelessness were having a positive effect. > Compared to more rapid rises in homeless counts over the past five years, a slower 4 percent increase represents progress, said Kyra Zylstra, interim director of All Home, the county’s homelessness coordinating agency, which organizes the yearly count. > “It’s not the kind of progress we all want to see,” Zylstra said. “But our performance data shows that the resources that we are investing in are housing people faster.” The whole point of the head tax was to continue funding recommendations from the Poppe report. They're the same recommendations that are demonstrated to be working. [0] https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/pathwayshome/BPA.pdf https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/pathwayshome/B... [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/new-homeless-count-in-king-county-shows-spike-in-number-of-people-sleeping-outside/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/new-homel...
- xapata 8y ago
  I've participated in one-night homeless counts before, such as the once cited for that news article. I don't find the evidence of improvement compelling. If this Poppe report was the purpose of the tax, why was all the messaging "Tax Amazon!" instead of, "We need money for urgent projects!"? Despite being 70 pages, that report was quite vague. Mostly platitudes like, "Prioritize the most vulnerable!" I hope the plans were more detailed elsewhere. And how much did that report cost?