Posted on 10/06/2021 7:06:59 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Three glistening new buildings in downtown Seattle with 165 studio apartments — originally to be rented at market rates — will instead house the homeless.
The Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI) is buying the buildings with taxpayer dollars for about $50 million, with federal COVID-19 relief funds splitting the cost equally. Seattle City Hall is contributing about $25 million, while also using “American Rescue Plan Act” funds. A large portion comes from Washington State’s Department of Commerce.
Left-wing Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan, so unpopular she can’t run for re-election, claims the deals will house people quickly and cheaply, compared to the time and cost required to develop similar projects from scratch. The three upscale buildings should be occupied by the end of the year.
Tent encampments in public spaces have grown in Seattle for decades, especially during the pandemic, due to poor leadership and unaffordable housing. Durkan recently extended Seattle’s so-called eviction moratoriums for the sixth time.
“The city and county have been enabling the homeless for a couple decades, and that’s what’s made the problem worse,” a lifelong Seattle-area resident told PJ Media Wednesday. “They destroy the hotels they get put in and have turned the city into a place that rivals a third world country. The homeless are far more dangerous than the gangs are in Seattle, and yes, Seattle has a big gang problem.”
Related: California Cities Dominate Unemployment List
Each of the three Capitol Hill buildings has micro-apartments that were permitted in 2019 before the pandemic hit. They were designed in 2017 and 2018 “as Seattle’s tech industry boomed and young workers moved to the city in droves, driving up demand for apartments near downtown. They’re located near jobs, stores, social services and transit options.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
They will be trashed in two years.
Woke media outlets refuse to say “homeless” and instead say “people experiencing homelessness.”
It’s supposed to seem more evolved — like they’re not defining someone by a lack of home. But they are.
It’s just a verbose way of saying the exact same thing.
And did it take “a whole lotta tryin’
Just to get up that hill”?
“They will be trashed in two years”
Pffft.....try two months.
You don't know addicts. I'll give it six months.
Has the heroin/fentanyl concession been awarded yet?
It sounds like more alterations of language to be politically correct.
We hear sometimes about “pregnant people” rather than “pregnant women”, because they don’t want to assume that only women would be pregnant. After all, there was once a “transgender” man who was pregnant. Thus in their world, men can be pregnant too, so we don’t want to stereotype anyone.
It’s along the lines of how we aren’t supposed to say “illegal aliens” anymore, because that is now considered pejorative, even though it is perfectly descriptive.
Why not build some Tent encampments with water and sewer they seam to like Tent encampments
As for the taxpayers buying them under this program, instead of Seattle taxpayers assuming dead properties, now it's taxpayers throughout the country who paid for it. In other words, a bailout for a Democrat city that makes poor decisions.
It's too bad they couldn't give them to Antifa to be "Autonomous Zones" and let them run them.
Ah yes. Take drug addicts, people who poop on the street and crazy people and put them in an apartment building. And when there is a crime they’ll send in dumb, young social workers. I’m sure you can see what will happen next.
Who owned the buildings? Follow the money.
And declared UN livable by humans.
There ya go - the pathetic new America.... and paid for by arrested and punished hard working honest taxpayers!!
Free money for all the drugs and alcohol they want ?
Guaranteed.
There! Fixed it!
Math=is that $300k/unit?
Good catch.
Years ago, Gore Vidal made an interesting observation. Vidal had had many affairs with men. He was somewhat famous for it. He said that "no one is homosexual". He said that the phrase was essentially meaningless. The topic, really, was about behavior. Some men committed homosexual acts. Some men spent their entire lives committing homosexual acts. He was one such man. But he made the point that there was nothing inherently or irrevocably "homosexual" about any one.
Of course, the Left rejects such thinking today.
The Left would now say that "homosexual" would the absolute essence of some people. It's not about behavior. It's who you are.
Oh, but "homeless"? Hey, that's not who you are! You're just a person "experiencing homelessness".
They seem to like having it both ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.