World Cup Glow, Homeless Surge: Seattle's Unsheltered Population Up 21%

[00:00:10] Hello and welcome to the latest World Cup Fever edition of Seattle Nice. I'm David Hyde with Erica C. Barnett of Publicola, who has presumably been swept up in World Cup Fever over the last week or so, right Erica? Well, I did take last Friday partly off to go downtown and just walk around. I walked down the waterfront down to Pioneer Square just to kind of soak up the vibes and it was really fun.

[00:00:34] Cool. And so there I will say political consultant Sandeep Kaushik has also been walking around Pioneer Square, as I understand it, because you were unable to drive to your cushy classic brick office. That's true. I was down there. I've actually been staying away from Pioneer Square on game days, but I did make an exception on Friday like Erica.

[00:00:55] I went down there to kind of see the spectacle of it and holy shit, it was like wild and intense and fun and cool. Like, I thought it was great. I thought it was a beautiful day. Shit loads of people out there, excited fans, fun atmosphere. The Australians were psyched, you know, and they were there on mass or whatever. Like, it was good. It was very good. I thought it was a

[00:01:25] very good day for Seattle, a very fun day. I was glad I was down there. And it's so weird because like previously, because I only ever look at Twitter, I had thought Seattle is dying and then now I realize it's not. Thank you. Thank you, World Cup people for telling me what's... Well, I will, and I will say too, I am in another disclosed World Cup location right now. I'm in Houston. Oh.

[00:01:46] And, you know, all the watch parties here are sold out and it's, you know, also like just a madhouse of World Cup fever here too. So it's pretty exciting. Made it kind of hard to park last night when we went out to eat, but yeah, it's a good vibe here too. And we may get another U.S. game, right? If they win in the round of 32, the round of 16 game is going to be here and it's going to be crazy. So, yeah.

[00:02:12] Crazy. All right. Now, just to take the mood in a totally different direction, I guess. The latest... Let's just talk sports the whole time. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sports talk. So, to take the mood in a different direction. The latest count, it's not a one-time count. Erica is going to explain the type of methodology we now use to account for both sheltered and unsheltered homelessness is kind of bad news, it sounds like.

[00:02:41] The biggest increase is with folks living outside or in tents or cars. Around two-thirds of people in the latest count, right, Erica? Yeah, that's right. It's about 64%, I think. And, you know, the King County Regional Homelessness Authority had stopped doing a point-in-time count and stopped doing an annual count back in 2024.

[00:03:04] So, instead of that, they do interviews, essentially, with people who come in to fixed locations. And then they give those people gift cards and they can theoretically get a larger gift card if they go out and recruit somebody. So, it's like $25, I think, or $20. Then it's an extra five bucks to recruit somebody to come in. And so, through that method, the idea is that you kind of spread through a community of people who are living unsheltered.

[00:03:33] And, you know, I mean, I think there are, you know, I've heard that there have been some problems with the interviewing process, that people are just kind of handing the, you know, the gift cards or, you know, handing the recruitment form, however it works, to sort of people on the street, like right outside the locations. And, you know, I don't know how widespread that is. But, at any rate, they use that and then they do a sort of statistical, they apply a statistical model to it to, you know, represent underrepresented groups.

[00:04:02] Native Americans are a very small percentage of the population, but they're a large percentage, very disproportionate homeless population, for example. So, it's statistical. It has resulted in much higher numbers than the, like, 2022 and previous counts.

[00:04:18] And, yeah, this year it went up by about 9% overall, but the unsheltered population went up 21% from two years ago, which is, you know, an astonishing jump at a time when, you know, we actually have lost shelter beds in the region. So, it makes sense. And there's a lot of reasons for, you know, it's not just that a ton of new unsheltered people came here. There's, you know, there's throughput in the system and there's people getting into housing. It's just that there's not enough housing and there's not enough shelter.

[00:04:47] So, Sandeep, what do you think is going on? Well, there's a number of things, right? I mean, first of all, I find this methodological shift stuff to be very – I don't know quite what to make of the actual counts and how much I should trust the numbers, right? I don't really quite understand whether this new methodology is actually more accurate or not.

[00:05:10] So, anyway, I don't quite know. And obviously it's apples to oranges to try to compare it with past stuff because it is a big radical change in how they do it. You know, they used to actually go out and do a one-night count, right? They would have all these people go out and try to count the number of homeless people they encountered and they're not doing that anymore. So, anyway, so you can't really compare with – go very far back to compare with past stuff.

[00:05:37] Which we should just point out is a little confusing if you look at the graphic in the Seattle Times, which is comparing 2026 all the way back to 2016. And so it's a little head-scratching given that the methodology actually changed. But they're not here to explain themselves. So, anyway. The numbers are quite a bit lower because they do it in the dead of winter when there's going to be more people in shelters. And it's just widely viewed and always was as a drastic undercount because you're estimating based on seeing somebody in a car.

[00:06:07] I mean it's just – it was not a good method either for accuracy. But, yeah, I mean I do have questions about the new methodology like you, Sandeep. Yeah, and then the stuff that jumped out at me, first of all, the spin coming out of the people who issued this was, hey, this is in some sense progress because the number of homeless people only jumped 9 percent.

[00:06:29] The overall number was only up 9 percent and that's lower than the 22 percent increase that we saw in the last count when they implemented the new methodology. But I think Erica's take on this was right in Publicola, which is what you should be really looking at is the number of unsheltered homeless people, which jumped 21 percent. So that was a big jump. Secondly, I don't quite understand what's happened here.

[00:06:54] But, yes, the number of shelter slots or shelter beds has actually decreased from – not a huge number. The decrease isn't huge, but it's definitely a decrease at a time when homelessness is rising. So that's a red flag. And then the other thing to take out of it is that we are still not at net zero, right? And the problem with these counts is that they're a static snapshot of one – they present sort of a picture of one moment in time.

[00:07:24] And homelessness is a kind of dynamic system of people kind of entering and exiting homelessness all the time, right? And so the more accurate way to look at this is like how many people are falling into homelessness and how many people are being exited and are we exiting more people than are falling in, right? Are we at net zero or better than that? And clearly we're not.

[00:07:46] And what their numbers were saying is that 18,000 people experienced homelessness I think was the number in the last year and 17,000 people exited, right? So there was a kind of net 1,000-person deficit, right, or increase. So anyway, those are a few things that kind of jumped out at me like why are we losing shelter spaces? Yeah.

[00:08:10] I wonder if, Erica, you could pick up on that thread about the reduction, especially in family shelter beds it sounds like. Well, I mean, I covered this quite a bit and we've talked about this over the last four years. I mean, under Bruce Harrell and most of the shelter spaces are in Seattle. And under Bruce Harrell, we lost a lot of shelter and that has not been reversed. And I think this was a big issue in the campaign with Katie Wilson, who's now the mayor.

[00:08:35] And, you know, I mean, we just were not significantly adding shelter as, you know, for example, a tiny house village would have to close down because it was, you know, on a site temporarily. You know, we weren't replacing shelter as fast as shelters were closing down. Now, the family shelter, I don't know exactly the reason for that. There is a big gap there. Family shelters are both easier and harder to site, I think.

[00:08:59] They're easier because everybody, you know, loves giving money to family shelters because those folks are seen, I think. I mean, they are more vulnerable, but they're also seen as more deserving by companies like Amazon, which gives to Mary's Place. And, you know, so easier in that sense, but harder in that, you know, families have, you know, often, you know, they need more space. They have more complicated needs because there's kids. And so, you know, I mean, I think the takeaway is shelter of all kinds is really lacking.

[00:09:28] And we need to do more of everything. And this was part of Mayor Wilson's promise or commitment that, you know, has not quite come to fruition to add 1,000 shelter beds in our first year. And, you know, we're in June. There are, I think, around, you know, there are 75 that have already opened. I think there's another 90 that are coming online soon. But, you know, it's a slow pace. But it's better than under Herald where, you know, we saw a very clear decline.

[00:09:57] Yeah, the mayor is basically saying this just shows my campaign is right, right? We need more emergency shelter. We need more shelter of all kinds. And we need it now. And King County Executive is saying similar things. Yeah, I've been supportive of the mayor going big and bold on this. Like, you know, she is right. We do need more shelter. And we need to, you know, we need to get more unsheltered people out of encampments, which, you know, we've talked about the whole politics around encampments and also the problems around encampments, right?

[00:10:26] The actual substantive problems that encampments can create in neighborhoods and communities. So, yeah, I'm all for the mayor going big and bold on this. But as Erica was alluding to, her effort seems a little, I don't know, stalled right now. Like, you know, they have the two announcements of the two villages that they're opening up that adds up to about 165. They've announced some expansions of existing shelter sites.

[00:10:52] But we really haven't had an announcement of anything new in, what is it, a couple of months now? And the clock is ticking on there. You know, and look, I think it was always unrealistic that they were going to get to 500 by the World Cup. That was, you know, so I'm going to, I'm willing to cut them some slack on that.

[00:11:11] But if they don't get somewhere in the vicinity of a thousand by the end of the year, which is, you know, her big promise that she said she's going all in on, that's not going to be a good look for them, especially given the scale of the problem here. And given the fact that they've made this such a centerpiece of her mayoral administration. So anyway, I, yeah, I'm curious to see what, you know, I'm waiting, like, what's next? When's the next announcement? You know, what's, what's going on here?

[00:11:38] I do think that is a political issue that you were raising, Sandeep Kaushik. I mean, I didn't, you know, I didn't hear you criticizing Bruce Harrell for closing down shelters and not, you know, and the fact that KCRHA was, you know, was defunding shelters because of, you know, lack of funding from the city to keep shelters open. I mean, you know, I mean, yes, Katie Wilson made, made, you know, a commitment to build a lot of shelter. She is going in the right direction, which is an improvement over the last mayor.

[00:12:07] But I would, I mean, I too would like to see more movement. But homelessness is like, it's going to land on the feet of the mayor no matter what. And it's the most challenging problem that we have. Yeah. Just to be clear, like at least during the campaign last year, the stat was that the number of shelter beds in Seattle had remained essentially static. I think the number was that there would be a 13 bed increase over the entirety of Bruce Harrell's first term in the city of Seattle. So there were a bunch of shelters that closed and others that opened and it was kind of a net no increase.

[00:12:37] And I do think that very much to your question. Absolutely. Bruce Harrell deserved criticism for that. And I think we did criticize him for not doing enough at the time. And so, again, I'm supportive of the mayor going big and bold on this. I think she's right that that this is something that needs to happen. And it's just, you know, they're running into the reality of citing and opening these things is pretty complicated and hard.

[00:13:02] You know, and yeah, I mean, hopefully they can break through some of the barriers to getting this stuff stood up. But, you know, I don't know. We'll see. Jury's still out on this initiative. All right, let's talk about a not directly but somewhat possibly related issue, which is the sort of ongoing problems at 12th and Jackson. It's actually 12th and King. I don't know why we always call it 12th and Jackson.

[00:13:30] But these days I think it's more like 12th and King that we're talking about here. But, Sandeep, I know you wanted to bring this up because the mayor announced essentially a zero tolerance plan for some of the drug activity, etc. that's going on there. So what have you been hearing behind the scenes? Hey, Seattle nice listeners.

[00:14:00] Seattle politics got you low. We'll get high with Uncle Ike's. Pissed at the mayor? Relax with a dollar joint. Pop a tire in a pothole? Eat a $2 gummy? And chill? Whether you need something to pump you up for Saturday's protest or a mellow strain for your next sit-in, Ikes is your best friend. Now is the time to roll up, Seattle.

[00:14:27] Download the Ikes app today or head on over to Ikes.com. That's Ikes.com. Yeah, I wouldn't call it a plan, right? I think we're still waiting to hear what the plan actually is.

[00:14:48] What I would say is that the mayor last week put out a strong statement saying they are launching an initiative targeted at Little Saigon and that part of North Beacon Hill around Jose Rizal Park, which has a – so the open-air drug and stolen goods market in Little Saigon. And then the kind of two large, very drugged-out encampments that are in North Beacon Hill and that have been drawing a lot of attention.

[00:15:16] And her language in this announcement, which was on the 17th, was very, very strong, right? I mean it was – I'm just going to read you little bits of it. We must disrupt the drug-dealing public disorder and other illegal activity that has destabilized this community. After months of deep listening, my administration is taking a new path forward. We will no longer tolerate open-air drug sale and use and vending stolen goods. We are expanding police personnel. So it goes on like that, right?

[00:15:46] And also council member – district two, council member Eddie Lin, a progressive echoing that kind of language. That's right. So what the fuck does all that mean, right? I mean as I tweeted when the announcement came out, we heard stuff like this periodically from Bruce Harrell too. And there would be these sort of temporary police deployments or they'd put one of those mobile precinct fans down at like 12th and Jackson or in Little Saigon somewhere.

[00:16:15] And for three weeks, they'd sort of clear the neighborhood and then they'd pull the police resources back and it'd go right back to where it was before. So is this more of the same or is it something different? And that's what I think it's going to be very interesting to dig into. But anyway, I'll hold off on that. Let's – I'd like to kind of hear what Eric is hearing and then I'll weigh in on what I'm hearing. Yeah, I mean it's kind of a combination of good and bad from what I'm hearing.

[00:16:41] I mean good and bad meaning bad I'm defining as things that we've done a million times and haven't worked, which is this hotspot policing bullshit. And we're doing that again. You know, flood the zone with cops, drive everybody a block over because that's what happens literally every single time. Then the cops go away and people move back. So I am not a fan of that approach. I don't think it's effective. I think it's temporary. I think, you know, it's the definition of insanity kind of stuff at this point.

[00:17:09] But at the same time, I think what they are trying to do with – they're investing about a million dollars in expansion of WeDeliverCare services at that site, which has been an approach that the city has taken in Belltown. It's people that go out. They're kind of ambassadors and talk to people. They're – Also, Third Avenue. WeDeliverCare, right? Did a bunch of stuff on Third Avenue too. Yeah, I was thinking Third Avenue in Belltown. But yeah.

[00:17:39] Yeah. Other parts of Third Avenue as well. And so they will be, you know, a presence until 11 p.m. I think now it's – they're only there until about 2 o'clock in the afternoon. And then there's going to be a shift of existing resources for LEAD, law enforcement-assisted diversion to that area. There's no additional funding for LEAD. And this $1.1 million I think is temporary. So, you know, talk about the jury stole out.

[00:18:06] I mean we're – we have tried different approaches. I mean I've written about, you know, other times when they've put co-lead at 12th and Jackson and, you know, other programs that are effective in, you know, different contexts. But yeah. I mean the fact is like it's 12th and King because – you know, in large part because the city has – you know, they do cleaning there, like physical cleaning of the sidewalks. But they also – I mean there's a giant fucking fence there with razor wire at the top of it, which Bruce Harrell installed.

[00:18:36] You know, I mean I remember going to that press conference in that parking lot. And now it's like the most inhospitable street scene you can ever imagine. I mean nothing's ever going to be like inviting about that parking lot, you know, and that area when you have this, you know, prison-like razor wire there. And I think that is actually a huge problem.

[00:18:55] And I think the lack of activity, you know, on the street like farmer's markets and things that, you know, are used in other neighborhoods to, you know, to make the street like more hospitable to everybody else. That's the thing that's effective at sort of driving out antisocial or whatever you want to call it activity as well as actually, you know, providing services for people in that area. So, you know, that's another one that's been complicated for many, many years.

[00:19:24] So I hope this is something different, but I'm just seeing kind of a small investment in a few more hours of services and shifting services around. So I'm not terribly optimistic. Well, I will say this. Obviously the mayor's announcement caught my attention because of the strong language and wording in it. And I was like, holy shit, Katie Wilson is coming out hard here. And now a couple of things about that.

[00:19:51] One, it's not actually that much of a deviation from what she was saying during the campaign last year, right? She very publicly and often criticized the incumbent mayor then, Bruce Harrell, for the situation at 12th and Jackson. And she would point to it on the campaign trail and say, this is unacceptable. You have failed. What's going on in that neighborhood and to that community is causing a huge amount of harm.

[00:20:19] She ended up when she won, putting the head of Friends of Little Saigon as one of the key leaders of her transition. It was very clear for months now that they've been cooking some kind of initiative, though we had no details about it. And now we're actually seeing it kind of come to the fore, though we still don't have a lot of details about how this is going to work. Sandeep, what are you hearing behind the scenes about kind of what's really going on?

[00:20:47] Yeah, that's a good question. I talked to somebody last week in the mayor's orbit because I was like, wow, you guys are really like putting out this strong statement. What does this mean? And look, to what Erica was saying, yes, there's some expansion of kind of, yes, we deliver care, some money going to that. But this is really a policing first initiative, right?

[00:21:10] That's what – and the big decision that they've made is that they're willing to deploy police to disrupt or end the drug dealing, the open-air drug dealing and stolen goods market in Little Saigon.

[00:21:29] And what this person close to the mayor said is they're willing to make arrests in order to try to take back the space, right, to stop the activity that's been plaguing that community for years now. And that's the thing I'm saying isn't going to work because that's not new. I mean willing to make arrests is just like willing to do more of the same thing that never works.

[00:21:55] Well, here's – and so I started doing some more digging on this, talking to some people that were involved in the planning of this. And this has been months in the making. David, to your point, Eddie Lynn, the council member for that area, has been at the table along with SPD and some of the providers and the first responders and the mayor's office to cook this effort.

[00:22:16] What I'm hearing is that it's not entirely fleshed out yet, but this is a kind of police-first initiative where, at least in theory, there is going to be a 24-7 police presence on those blocks in Little Saigon, which is – and I say this is in theory because even now they're not 24-7 down there in the first week that they've announced this initiative.

[00:22:41] But supposedly that's the intent and the police are there not just to kind of stand around, but if there is drug-dealing activity or stolen goods being sold, they're going to walk over to those people and say, you can't do this here. And you – I'm just laughing at that. If they don't leave, they're going to bust you, right? It's just so ridiculous. Like, oh, wow.

[00:23:04] So you're just using a lot of words to describe – I mean, and I'm not saying this – I'm not directing this at you, Sandeep, but I mean it's the same stupid fucking shit. Like, great. OK, cops are going to bust guys and that's going to fix their addiction and that's going to make the open-air drug dealing that's been there forever go away. I mean it's just – it's laughable to me. Like, I'm sorry. It is just laughable.

[00:23:27] So is there a role in Seattle for – I mean this is kind of something new, I think, isn't it, Erica, in the sense that what we're talking about now isn't corporate support for the carceral state but kind of more of a socialist support for the carceral state, which are kind of different things, right? Yeah. I mean I don't think this is a socialist approach. I think this is – gets to the heart of sort of what is going on with Katie Wilson and her supporters right now.

[00:23:53] I think like a lot of her supporters are like, what the hell is going on? Yeah. I mean more cops is not a socialist approach to anything. I mean she can call herself a socialist and be a socialist on many issues but there is no – as far as I know, I don't pretend to be an expert on the socialist position on everything. But pretty sure it doesn't involve the carceral state and just arresting a bunch of people.

[00:24:18] And so, yeah, I mean just because Katie Wilson calls herself a socialist doesn't mean that the same old lock-em-up approach is socialist. I guess what I mean by it would be an emphasis on things like harm reduction, rehabilitation, restorative justice, but also policing, potentially jail as opposed to an abolitionist perspective. Well, an abolitionist – I mean Katie Wilson is not an abolitionist. She said that on the campaign trail.

[00:24:46] We shouldn't be surprised that she is not an abolitionist. She made that clear. Right, but DSA kind of is, right? So she's obviously differing with Democratic Socialists of America. But anyway, Sandeep, what do you think? Well, a couple of things. One, I don't think there's anything inherently contradictory or incompatible between socialism and policing per se, right? I mean, yes, maybe the DSA is abolitionist, but that doesn't mean that you can't have a form of socialism that involves some policing. So one thing.

[00:25:15] Secondly, I think to call this a sort of carceral state approach is just totally wrong as I understand what they're trying to do here, right? I'm talking about the policing portion of it that you were talking about. Well, let me speak to that because they're not – as I understand this initiative, it is not about putting people in jail, right? It is about using police powers and using arrests.

[00:25:40] But like – so as it was explained to me how this would work, like the cops come up to somebody who's engaging in these activities they're not supposed to be engaging in in the Little Saigon area. They're going to be told you can't do that here and you either have to leave or if you continue this activity, you will be subject to arrest. If they continue that activity, they're going to get arrested. But then what's supposed to happen is there's a conversation with the person. What's your issue?

[00:26:09] What's going on with you? Cops don't do social services. I'm sorry. Like maybe individual cops who are exceptional do. No, and then there's supposed to be a – and then there's supposed to be a handoff to lead, right? That's how it was – it was explained in the announcement. Now, whether there's going to be – With no additional funding. Well, whether the – I think, Karika, it does raise a bunch of questions. Are the cops going to be trained appropriately?

[00:26:36] Will they have the protocol down to have that conversation to actually be able to make that more handoff in a way that's effective and does something? Or is this – or – and what I'm hearing right now is that there may be some differences of opinion within the team of people pulling this together. And really, SPD may be right now looking at this as more a kind of we're going to go in there and bust some bad guys.

[00:27:01] And other people are looking at it as no, we're going to use a kind of post-arrest diversion model to try to better address the issue and to clear the area of the activity which has plagued this neighborhood, right? So I think that's what we're going to have to see play out with this initiative. And also – and last point and then I'll shut up. Also, are they – supposedly, this is a kind of permanent to semi-permanent effort.

[00:27:25] So my big question is, is this going to be another Bruce Harrell, we do this for three weeks for the PR and then it goes away and we're right back to square one? Or are they really going to do a sustained effort here? So if it's a permanent police effort – I mean the stories that I've heard are exactly what you said. And it's the cops thinking they can go in and bust heads or just kind of being completely inept at knowing how to talk to people, get them to trust them, get them to go to lead, et cetera.

[00:27:54] And so ultimately it's the cops' call here because they're the ones that are being – that are going to flood the zone along with We Deliver Care. But I mean if there is going to be an overwhelming presence of cops, what's going to happen is the same thing as always. It's going to move a little bit over to the left or the right where it's not as visible. The police will say job well done, pat each other on the back, and we'll be back to the same old thing.

[00:28:20] I mean, and so, yeah, I mean if it's like we're going to move – we're shifting lead resources from other parts of the city where they're helping different people to this part of the city to help these people. You know, it's gone back since the pandemic to being basically a diversion program run by – or not run by the police, but at the sort of behest of the police. So if they are not – and I'm just not hearing great things about the new recruits.

[00:28:49] I'll say that. And so whether this current police force is up to the task, I am skeptical. Well, we're going to see. But – and to the whack-a-mole issue, I asked about this to somebody who was involved in pulling this whole effort together. And the answer I got on that was, well, look, first of all, yeah, maybe there will be some whack-a-mole displacement that happens here.

[00:29:16] But the important thing is that this particular community of Little Saigon has had to suffer really serious social harm. So, you know, it's an immigrant, you know, Vietnamese community that's been born the brunt of this massive open-air drug market and stolen goods market. This has gone on forever. And those people deserve to have their neighborhood back.

[00:29:45] But that's – you're just making a political point. I mean nobody disagrees with that is the thing. That's just a political point. It's the same as, you know, Ann Davison saying on KUOW a couple weeks ago when I was on that, you know, sex trafficking is really horrible. And you can tell any number of very lurid stories about how horrible it is, but that doesn't actually solve the problem. It's not just about the lurid stories. It's not just about the social and economic harm that's being created and ameliorating that.

[00:30:11] Well, when I say lurid stories, I mean things that are happening to women and young girls that are true. And you can tell any number of, like, of stories about how bad it is. But that doesn't solve the problem. And so I just feel like that's a political point. Eddie Lin, though, Eric is here in the Seattle Times, quoted, Drug dealers and other criminal elements are taking advantage of and profiting from the suffering of our most vulnerable. It should be easier to get health care, housing, and treatment than it is to get illegal drugs.

[00:30:38] It's sort of the pimp drug dealer focus for this. And then again, I mean, that's pretty progressive language. That's really pretty progressive language in terms of what Eddie Lin wants to do there, right? I mean, so let's hope it works. He wants to have universal health care. Everybody wants that. I mean, yeah, I just I'm so tired. Like, maybe I've just been covering this stuff for too long at this point now. But like, yeah, woulda, shoulda, coulda. Everything should be different. But like, are you making it different? No, Eddie Lin.

[00:31:07] Like, I mean, or anybody. I mean, I feel like we are very good at defining the problem and saying how bad it is and saying here are the root causes. And if we fixed all of this. But like, even in that statement, I mean, you're defining two categories of people. Drug dealers who are bad and drug users who are vulnerable and being preyed upon by this other category of people. When, you know, for the most part, it's all the same people. Like, the drug users and the drug dealers are not like, I mean, if you're talking about traffickers, then yes, that's different.

[00:31:36] But like, misdemeanor level drug dealers, you know, are not, you know, they are also vulnerable. Like, these are drug users who sell. Anyway, I just feel like there's the nuance of the conversation is lost. And it's not useful, except politically, to say we need to have health care and we need to have treatment. And we need, we need, we need. Well, but nobody's providing all those things. The state doesn't have money. The city doesn't have money. The county doesn't have money. KCRHA doesn't have money.

[00:32:03] And so I just, I just find that kind of rhetoric really meaningless and, you know, and tiresome at this point. Because we can all say what we should have, but that doesn't mean it's going to happen. Fair points. Fair points. I've always found that rhetoric to be tiresome and meaningless. Like, progressives have been saying that, like, root causes. We should address that stuff since, you know, time immemorial. Well, I also find the rhetoric that we should just lock them all up equally tiresome.

[00:32:33] Because that also is, like, not doable. I agree with that, too. But, but there has to be some kind of middle ground between the old progressive position, which is until we address all of these root causes and, like, you know, fix capitalism, we can't, like, do anything about the immediate situation on the streets in Seattle. And the kind of, you know, right-wing view that, you know, all these people are degenerates and criminals and should all be, like, in prison forever. In prison forever, right?

[00:33:01] There's got to be some kind of more functional middle ground here. And I think what's happening when you see Katie Wilson and Eddie Lynn, and I've actually talked to other people that code kind of left recently who are saying that even among the kind of, you know, movement left or, you know, progressive world, there is a, at least some debate going on right now about these issues, about kind of the proper role of policing.

[00:33:30] About what the right interventions are, right? And there is, we're seeing an evolution going on among at least some element of the progressive left in Seattle that, you know, the mayor's initiative is exemplifying. And so it's going to be interesting to watch how that plays out. Erica's obviously articulating a more traditional progressive view about this.

[00:33:51] Well, now I'm just articulating that I think that politicians in Seattle, you know, whether on the right or the left, whether it's Ann Davison or whether it's Katie Wilson, are very adept at using rhetorical talking points for their side. But neither side is, you know, when you're, when you say either side, we should lock everybody up or we should have universal healthcare.

[00:34:16] Like neither side has an actual proposal to fund and, and do their sort of utopian or dystopian, you know, alternative. All right. Well, I've got zero tolerance for continuing this conversation. So let's end it there. Erica gets the last word. She's Erica C. Barnett. He's Sandeep Kaushik. I'm David Hyde. Thanks everybody so much for listening. And for donating and getting access to our special members only perks on patreon.com slash. Is it Seattle nice?

[00:34:45] I think it's Seattle nice. It is Seattle nice. It's somewhere on Patreon. Yeah. Okay. And thanks everybody so much for listening.