There are certainly compounding issues, but that's not my understanding of programs such as the ones in operation in Seattle where housing is being provided with limited strings attached and the homeless population has seen a significant decrease especially among those who are chronically homeless. Though such programs haven't exactly been widespread because too many people's knee jerk reaction is "I've got to pay for my house, why should they be given one for free?"
Seattle's programs have been a disaster. Since the started the programs they have had a HUGE influx of homeless people. And a 280% increase in overdose deaths inside these units.
Secondly Seattle's programs is in crisis due to the buildings being sold by the non-profits becauae they cant afford to operate anymore. Seattle isnt funding these places and people who are there are not paying.
"13 buildings with more than 1,100 units where low-income people live is an unusual amount and a symptom of something bigger: The affordable housing sector is at a breaking point."
“If nonprofit and mission-driven housing providers can’t afford to keep their properties running, we won’t just see an increase in evictions, but we will see the loss of the entire affordable housing portfolio,” said Patience Malaba, executive director of the Housing Development Consortium, a network of Seattle housing providers.
In Seattle Housing Authority buildings, the number of tenants not paying was 8% in 2019 and 23% last year.
Additionally, Harrell will soon sign an executive order authorizing more rental assistance, according to a spokesperson.
Still, providers say it hasn’t been enough and are pushing for more, and faster. The city’s pace, said Emily Thompson, partner at the for-profit GMD Development, “does not meet the moment of the crisis we find ourselves in.”
Some in the sector worry that if buildings continue losing money and banks foreclose on them, private investors may pull out of Seattle’s affordable housing market altogether, causing the system to fall apart.
City officials say they have already spent a lot of money in the short term trying to stabilize affordable housing and are looking into long-term sustainable solutions. They expect to meet the housing production goals of the 2023 levy, but they face an increasingly tight budget, and are weighing trade-offs between stabilizing and preserving existing affordable housing and new units.
Officials at the state Housing Finance Commission said they’re also shifting their focus away from adding as many affordable housing units as they can.
“Now, I’d say it’s all hands on deck to preserve the units that we have,” said Lisa Vatske, a director at the agency.
So, Seattle's efforts are not working. Rhe enormous cost of these things is creating serious budgetary problems.
What happens far too often is that reality strikes rhe compassion fairy and and we realize that the whole nice idea cant be done. Because rhe people involved arw not stable enough. These non-profits want to be able to get rid of unsafe people in their building but cant.
AND the idea of I paid for my house so why do they get one for free is entirely valid. I pay income taxes and I pay property taxes. The idea of free must come with requirements. Like "your staying here until you are clean and able to be on your own. Or you are staying here because you aren't mentally well enough to be on your own.
I think people would pay for that. I would. Get them off the street and into a facility where they are not allowed out until clean.
