Since 2009, PubliCola has been Seattle’s reader-supported source for deeply sourced in-depth coverage of local, state, and regional politics and policy.
Contact Erica C. Barnett at erica@publicola.com.
Mailing address: P.O. Box 14328, Seattle, WA 98104.
Please consider adding a search feature and tag cloud to this website. These tools would support readers seeking access to past reporting.
Search tool is right over on the right; I don’t love visual “clouds” but there are tags on each post.
The Amended KCRHA Interlocal Agreement: A Critical Analysis:
The Amended and Restated Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for the King County Regional Homelessness Authority (KCRHA) has ignited significant debate, raising concerns about its potential impact on addressing the region’s homelessness crisis. A critical analysis of the agreement, combined with insights from sources like PubliCola, reveals several key areas of concern, particularly regarding power dynamics, bureaucratic structure, and the representation of lived experience.
One of the most significant shifts in the amended ILA is the increased influence of elected officials, specifically the King County Executive and the Seattle Mayor, within the KCRHA’s governing structure. This move is perceived by critics as a departure from the original intent of establishing an independent authority driven by expertise and lived experience. The potential for politicization of homelessness policy is a major concern, as decisions may become driven by political considerations rather than evidence-based strategies. This shift also raises fears of a reduced emphasis on lived experience, as the voices of those currently experiencing homelessness may be marginalized in favor of political priorities.
Furthermore, the agreement’s structure raises bureaucratic concerns. The complex governing structure and decision-making processes could lead to gridlock, hindering the KCRHA’s ability to respond effectively to the evolving needs of the homeless population. Critics also argue that the agreement may create a rigid bureaucratic structure that lacks the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances. Additionally, the increased political oversight could result in diluted accountability, making it difficult to pinpoint responsibility for the KCRHA’s actions.
The ILA’s guidelines for board membership have also drawn criticism, particularly regarding the representation of individuals with lived experience. While the agreement emphasizes the importance of their expertise, the prioritization of specific professional and technical skills creates a system that indirectly excludes those currently experiencing homelessness. This systemic bias favors individuals who have already achieved a level of stability, potentially muting the relevant voices of those living through the crisis. Their real-time experiences and perspectives are crucial for developing effective solutions.
Moreover, the agreement exhibits several general shortcomings. It lacks clear mechanisms for dispute resolution, which could lead to conflicts and hinder the KCRHA’s functionality. The decision-making process remains vague, potentially creating bottlenecks and slowing down crucial initiatives. The agreement also lacks specific and measurable performance metrics, hindering accountability and transparency. Financial oversight mechanisms need further detailing, and the process for amendments and modifications requires clarification. Potential conflicts of interest arising from elected official involvement are not explicitly addressed. Furthermore, while community engagement is mentioned, the agreement lacks detail on how it will be facilitated. Finally, a clearer articulation of the long-term vision for addressing homelessness is needed.
These concerns are further highlighted by the context of Seattle’s approach to homelessness, particularly Mayor Bruce Harrell’s emphasis on encampment removals. His administration’s focus on “obstruction” sweeps, increased frequency of removals, and prioritization of public spaces have drawn criticism from advocacy groups and community members. Concerns about the lack of shelter options, loss of personal belongings, and ethical treatment of homeless individuals have been raised. These sweeps, while aimed at addressing visible encampments, are widely viewed as not providing long-term solutions and simply displacing individuals.
In conclusion, the amended ILA, while intended to improve the KCRHA’s effectiveness, raises serious concerns about its potential to prioritize bureaucratic control and political influence over the expertise and lived experience of those most affected by homelessness. The agreement’s shortcomings, coupled with the city’s approach to encampment removals, paint a picture of a system that may be more focused on managing the visibility of homelessness than addressing its root causes.
Listening to Week In Review – You just taught a master class in how to keep your cool and respond effectively and with facts when someone makes blanket statements of cause and effect with no factual basis and refuses to acknowledge facts (much less humanity). I enjoy hearing multiple perspectives and respectful dialogue. It’s very unfortunate when one of the panelists, such as Carlson, repeatedly apply incorrect information to improperly conclude cause and effect. I don’t think I could have maintained my composure the way you did in the face of that!
Just wanted to thank you for all the real investigative work you do on matters of substance in the politics of the region. If only the Seattle Times, with presumably more resources to bring to bear on matters of import, could take a lesson from your example, instead of dedicating three reporters and a long front page story to the shocking matter of who paid for a private fireworks show. Sheesh.
I dont always agree with your “politics”, mostly on homelessness, but I only tune into Bill Radke’s program on Friday in the hope you’d be one of the panelists. You should start a podcast.
I heard you on the KUOW week in review program. You accused people who noted that Trudeau’s hair looks good of insulting women by feminizing (I think that was your word) him. Did Molly Ivens strike a blow against the Sisterhood by calling Rick Perry Governor Goodhair? Just wondering.
Actually, what I said was that the subtext when people make fun of a male politician for his hair is that by paying attention to his hair, or having “pretty” hair at all, they are mocking the fact that he seems feminine, and therefore frivolous and vain like a woman. The insult is that he is woman-like, which is of course the lowest class of human being. So, nothing about directly insulting women, plenty about how we feminize men and throw that at them as an insult so obvious we don’t even have to say, “It’s because you’re acting like a GIRL!” (See also: Every slur against gay men.)
Oh, and Molly Ivins’ offhand one-word descriptor (as opposed to the volumes that have been written about Trudeau the Pretty Boy) is not a term I would probably use, but then again, that was 15 years ago and she was of a different generation.
FYI on how the Emerald is describing the HALA process: http://southseattleemerald.com/2015/08/21/op-ed-seattles-urban-planners-have-a-language-all-their-own/
Hi Erica. Thank you for putting my thoughts to words about the homeless encampment debacle here in Ballard. You are right, this is a complex, yet classist issue. The vitriol spewing during these ‘discussions’ make me ashamed of my neighbors.
Additionally, I find the plan to house on the worst, by definition of health, piece of land has me thinking this is yet another form of crapping on our homeless. None of us would live in a spot used as a pesticide and heavy metal dump. Why should they?
I have been homeless for 4 years and have not ever slept in. A tent on Seattle city streets I seem to not been able to get no help because every one is focused of the tents on the public eye they’ll help them before they’ll help a single parent with children and I think that’s ridiculous cuz all these people are going to do is get into housing and screw it off cuz they’re all drug addicts and have mental diseases obviously they have mental problems with their living in a tent on the Seattle city streets there’s something wrong there yes these people need help but other people need help too and it’s kind of sad when I’ve contacted every single but every single agency I know to help me and haven’t gotten anywhere I’ve applied for the so-called regional access princess was to help people in my situation 10 times they have not done anything I have not ever heard back from them not one resource of that given me last time I signed up was not even a month ago the broad told me you’ll find a place and will help you get in it I found a place I have a job I work but I’m paying for a motels I hope paycheck so I have somewhere where me on my son can live because I can’t put my son in no tent I’m kind of mother does that yes we flipped in my car many nights but it’s better than the tent I think it’s pretty sad when they’ll help drug addicts before they’ll help a single parent with a kid that has no place to live the lady told me at regional access point which is a joke to call them when I find a place while I did and now all the sudden they have no funding imagine that they never help me with anything else so why would I think they would help me with this I think it’s pretty ridiculous and I think Seattle is pretty messed up behind this and says backwards and some backwards ass crap that’s what it is so yeah I’m probably going to continue homelessness because it’s a big fat run around and you get nowhere
Homelessness makes a lot of money for people. All that grant money gets paid to tgr “non-profit” workers and investors
I hope this is on your radar…I didn’t catch it until last night since the posts did not go to Next Door or to members of the Lakewook Community Club…Who the heck is running anyway. I want to read your take…
Seattle City Council District 2 Candidates Forum 22h ago
Jeannie O’Brien from Lakewood
Aren’t you getting tired of these warm summer-like evenings out in the yard, in the park, and on the water 🙂 ? Time to get back inside! Please join us for tomorrow night’s historic candidates forum – this is the first time Seattle city council candidates will be elected by district since the early 1900s. 7:00 p.m. at LSPCC, Tuesday, June 9th, 50th and Angeline. Eric Scigliano of Cross Cut is moderating. See you there!
S
Good morning Erica,
I faithfully podcast KUOW’s WEEK IN REVIEW and have noted the following on each of your appearances.
You have a verbal tic that distracts me (I can not know for anyone else) from the content of your message. “ya know” and “uhmmm” seems to be included in your every sentence. I do not see this in your writing.
Don’t be offended. No…I’m not perfect but I welcome observations from others that I can consider.
Best regards,
Gregg
Gregg, have you ever written to a man you heard on the radio about his distracting verbal tics?
Maybe there are no men on podcasts he listens to whom he respects enough to offer non-judgmental feedback.
Erica,
Just listening to last week’s Week in Review – Great replies on the “symbolic gesture” brush-off about the Shell Oil drilling actions by Todd. And for your story about being peppersprayed while covering past Mayday events.