Comments on: Unique meaning to “mobile home” for Seattle’s homeless

By: prefabrik ev fiyatlari

prefabrik ev fiyatlari — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:47:41 +0000

I like your style.
thank you.

Elizabeth A.

By: Tent City Opponent

Tent City Opponent — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:38:21 +0000

Well, so far on Mercer Island, TC4 has been a total screw up. We are all proponents of the homeless, but this particular entity (share/wheel) has not held up its side of the bargain! Citizens of Mercer Island-not United Methodist, not the city; and not share/wheel- brought to the citys attention, that there were three individuals living in TC4 with outstanding FELONY WARRANTS. Is this the responsibilty of the citizens. I guess it is on Mercer Island. We want the best for the homeless, but share/wheel does not even keep the homeless safe. It is a joke.

By: Mimi

Mimi — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:25:57 +0000

Thank you, Ashley. I agree that Seattle owes better options for the working poor. I will also tell you for many in Tent City 4 I know for a fact there were better options and those were turned down because attached to them were rules and regulations.

When questioned about length of stay for an average resident, Tent City 4 operators SHARE/WHEEL throw out random numbers but will tell you they keep no actual records or data on those that they serve. Without that information, how does one match up the needs of the homeless with supportive services that may be available to them?

So yes, while afordable housing is an issue, fostering complacency and a haven for people that don’t step it up is an issue as well.

Homelessness is a complex issue that requires a multi prong approach on many fronts, but I know there are better temporary options available and completely disagree with Tent City.

Thank you again for your work and presenting the various sides of this issue.

By: Ashley Cecil

Ashley Cecil — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:33:37 +0000

Thanks Mimi, I appreciate the insight. To play devil’s advocate, I assume Peggy would argue that the problem is not that Tent City residents lack interest in attaining permanent housing, but that the governmental structure in place prevents individuals earning minimum wage to afford the cost of living. Therefore, in addition to offering “transitional” housing, Tent City advocates also lobby for policy change to combat the issue. But, I don’t know nearly enough about the stats on the cost of living in Seattle, employment rate, etc. So I can’t participate in an educated conversation about it beyond a sharing my personal philosophy, which is that if Seattle truly can’t offer it’s poorest working residents housing, then Tent City has a legitimate purpose. If they’re fostering complacency and a haven for people that don’t want to step it up a notch, then I certainly wouldn’t stand behind them.

By: Mimi

Mimi — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 01:52:09 +0000

Hello Ashley,
Thank you for your thoughtful and well written article. I became involved with the Tent City 4 issue when it first began on the “Eastside” back in May 2004. I was labled a “homeless hater” right off the bat because I took serious issue with their tactics and questioned whether what they were doing was a hand out or a hand up. Now, having roamed the Eastside of Seattle for nearly four years, I can tell you your concerns and mine have been proven true. There are many, many individuals living in Tent City 4 who have been there for YEARS. Bruce Thomas “self proclaimed” camp advisor came from Tent City 3 in Seattle and moved into Tent City 4 when it opened in May 2004. He had spent 2-3 yrs. living in Tent City 3 and has been living in Tent City 4 for nearly 4 years. He has been interviewed many, many times (google his name) and states that he is a “street musician” with NO intention of ever leaving Tent City. For he and many, many others this is a “lifestyle” choice as painful as that may be to believe.
Leo Rhodes, another Tent City 4 resident since it began in May 2004 came over from Tent City 3 in Seattle where he testified before the King County Council under oath he had lived for 3-4 yrs, encompassing his entire time living in the state of Washington. Total combined stay between the two camps is now going on 7-8 yrs.
Don Goodwin, another Tent City 4 resident moved in when the camp opened at St. Brendan in May 2004 and he’s still there.
The problem is when you don’t provide supportive services to help the homeless break the cycle of homelessness, for too many, throwing them in a tent does nothing to change their situation. I firmly believe that Tent City 4 perpetuates the cycle of homelessness one tent at a time.
When offered alternative solutions, the operators of Tent City 3 &4, SHARE/WHEEL flatly refuse.
The controversy surrounding Tent City has nothing to do with not wanting to help the homeless and everything to do with putting an end to this in your face antics of SHARE/WHEEL run amuck. Rather than comply with city/county permitting requirements, all too often they are eager to move in illegally.
I don’t know how ‘temporary” one can call Tent City when Tent City 3 has been in operation for 10 years and Tent City 4 going on 4 and when you have people that have set up permanent residence. The claim is that this camp is a “temporary survival mechanism” (I can’t tell you how many times those running it have said that) but I don’t believe it can be called temporary when you have people living there for upwards of 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 years with no intention of ever leaving.
I’m sorry, but if you worked a minimum wage job, even after that many years of living in a tent rent free, one would have money to rent an apartment.
There are two sides to every story and while Ms. Hotes painted a pretty one, you are spot on in your concerns. Thank you for looking at this objectively!

Mimi

By: Ashley Cecil

Ashley Cecil — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:00:40 +0000

Hello Julie,

It’s great to hear another perspective on Tent Cities. Your questions involve lengthy answers, so check your email for my reply. Thank you for visiting the blog.

Ashley

By: Julie Clements

Julie Clements — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:11:38 +0000

Ashley,
Tent City 3 stays at the church I attend in Seattle for a couple of months out of the year and I have helped coordinate their stay the last couple of times. I love your work. I have two questions for you: First, I would like to ask if I can “cut and paste” your TC4 painting to use almost as a small icon in an electronic announcement for upcoming meetings within our cathedral. Second, I would be curious to have a conversation with you about the possibility of bringing your art to the cathedral to show (and sell) for a period of time during or around the time TC3 will be staying with us in 2008. Looking forward to your reply!

By: Ashley Cecil

Ashley Cecil — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:55:14 +0000

VERY good point Colleen. There definitely are guidelines and rules established by Tent City residents, but someone could easily tell a good story of hardship and lean on the community and be lazy. But they do background checks to filter out the crazies. On the other hand, there is no pressure from any committee, staff member, or social worker to find a job or go to school. I have mixed feelings about it. Peggy Hotes did bring to my attention some very strong points about homelessness and the cost of living to minimum wage gap that I had not considered. It’s a complex issue no doubt.

By: colleen

colleen — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:16:13 +0000

so does this set up allow hippie kids from the midwest to move to the west coast and live for free? it sounds like it would be condusive to such a crowd with the lack of “social workers” managing job search and whatnot.

By: jafabrit

jafabrit — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:41:55 +0000

That was an interesting read and enjoyed the links.