Thank you Mr. Mak:

It could have been done cheaper but that is Seattle.

But Now your talking about "Brew" AND This may be the concern: Wednesday 5:25 OUR anchor Jean! said,

"Gas prices are up because they are reformulating
the mix."

Now there was propagating an answer that is wrong...to say the least.

It is our part, ensure our BEST (she is great!) don't try to inform the people with such nonsense.

Reformulation of the 'old gas engine -- what are you talking about???

Silly and we're better than that.

We might have drunks & druggies that they're
looking at, but the engine has not changed.

this is not right we should not have to pay for this.

Wow! I'm gonna quit my job and crack a 6 pack so I can get free rent too. Thanks Mayor for enabling my slacker dream! Cheers to you!!!

The singular problem I have with this - is why can the city not have numerous and safe housing for the low income, single parents out there? What about the 28 year old - like my step son - working full time with half decent benefits - but because of the insane cost of housing, he can not live on his own? Why do we reward addictions and not hard work? Yes, I have issues with my tax dollars going to this kind of project - unless it is balanced to help those who WANT to fit into society in a meaningful and successful way.

If the Mayor wants to take care of our own as he says, then let him take these people home with him.What a ridulous misuse of our money. It's unbelievable the Mayor is this stupid !!!!

The peple saying "we should not have to pay for this" are missing the point. We were paying for these folks anyway. We were paying $1000 everytime they showed up at Harborview after stepping in front of a car, or falling off a curb. And these folks were still living on the streets. Now, we pay LESS for them, they end up in the ER less often (which means there is more availability in the ER when other folks show up). The idea that we have now removed and incentive for them to sober is also rediculious. These were folks who couldnt stop drinking even though it had cost them their housing, and usually and seblance of a life.

That's fine if you want to take these people off of the streets and create a safe environment for them.

But, why not put them out in a mobile home community in a rural area and make them mow lawns and pull weeds for their beer money, instead of keeping them on the streets bothering pedestrians and spending millions on their prime real estate.

So what do they do all day long? Obviously they don't have jobs so maybe they could be doing their part to help keep Seattle looking nice by picking up trash or they could fing some other way to repay the city of Seattle and it's taxpayers for giving them a safe place to live. It would just be nice if they found a way to show their appriciation! It's the least they could do.

Doing this is completely understandable but ONLY if ALCOHOL TAXES are solely used to fund the project. We shouldn't have to foot the bill for the ALCOHOL industry. Why not travel a step further and force the alcohol producing companies to GIVE FREE ALCOHOL to these people as well. And then we should all get together in a "Here, take my checkbook" manner and start washing their cars on the weekends too. Looks like we have a bunch of "DOCTORS" treating the symptoms again, and paying no attention to the problem. People should be fired from their positions as tax spenders for decisions like this.

Thank you for a fair and reasoned story about the housing for homeless alcoholics. I really appreciate our Mayor and City government people who can see through the excess judgment surrounding alcoholism and other mental illnesses and come to the humane conclusion that all human beings ought to be treated with kindness and dignity, regardless of their infirmities. If one visits third world countries where all stuggle to survive you will see those who are mentally ill are nonetheless treated with kindness. How can we do less in our affluent world?

I thought the coverage of this issue was reasonably balanced, although I also thought that some of Robert Mak's questions were deliberately inflammatory.

As a recovering substance abuser, I fully support the efforts of the 1811 Project to help house chronic late stage alcoholics. I have read extensively on this issue, and I know that the 1811 is saving Seattle taxpayers millions of dollars. I think that the fact that residents continue to drink is separate from the fact that they are being housed in a safe environment, are using fewer resources, and are being provided the opportunity to live the same type of dignified existence that many of us take for granted.

I say, more projects like the 1811. Bring 'em on!

David needs to pull his head out !!

1811 keeping people off the street & saving tax payers 2.5 million/year...sounds good to me!

So we work hard to make a living for ourselves and they can just drink and relax and have better living than hal of us that bust our butts to make a living. What a crock. Really makes you want to give up working and develop a habit. Help those that help themselves.

Our mayor is stupid... what a dumb idea. I work my ass off just to afford a place in Seattle and now my hard work is thrown in my face by that fat ass because he wants to give free housing to the drunks and druggies? Where do they get the money for the booze and drugs... maybe they can turn that money into rent instead. If housing was important to these "drunks and druggies" they would turn that money into a deposit for an apt. But yeah... way to go mayor... keep building these future crack houses.

Hi folks,
I appreciate Greg's efforts more than you know. I have three people who work with us when alcohol does not keep them away. The three live on the streets and I have been doing everything in my power given time and availabilty restraints to help these three find housing. The are good detail cleaners and when they are sober and show for work I always use their efforts. When not working they drink and live on the streets. These people are those who have given up on life and have no reason to live except to work and drink. Then drink some more. I feel like I enable these people to drink more but when I see them sober it makes me feel like I have helped in some small way. I have tried many times to help these men to find a place to live and have not been able to. If only there was a room for these people somewhere I feel this would give them some encouragement to continue. If there is room at 1811 for them I would feel like it was a blessing for sure and that God has answered my prayers for these people. Please let me know. I will clean the Mayor's office and carpet for free if we can get these people a place to live. Thank you so much for any consideration.

zzaw2b

This is the most wonderful, compassionate program possible. Seattle is recognizing alcoholism as an illness and is not tossing away people with the disease. Seattle deserves stars and angel wings for this program. Seattle is cool!

I think Housing First is a great idea. Having worked for the Veterans Administration with Homeless Veterans for over three decades I wish we had this option many years ago! Thank you for this program . And I totally support DESC and our Mayor for "doing the right thing " ! Face it folks! Addiction is expensive [ Ever Try to Loose Weight? ] and if nothing else this is SAVING US MONEY!!!

It is about time. It is the only way to end homelessness. We have a 10 yr plan to end homelessness in seattle, it has been failing miserably. These are human beings, our brothers and sisters. Its time to stop hating them. It is humane and economical. Great job Mayor Greg Nickels

i think that this method works because it coast $14,000 to house them but a survey in San Fransisco said that the average coast of a person on the streets is $100,000. also other cities have started a similar programs and the people in the houses are getting off the alcohol or drugs. look at the 'Now' article (this article follows a person in New York) to see what i mean about reducing coasts.

As a former homeless person, (I was homeless for almost four years in Snohomish County), I have seen first hand the 'homeless problem.' These people that are housed in the building at 1811 are chronic alcoholics and are more than likely not going to quit drinking no matter what incentive you give them to stop.

We have had a homeless problem in this area for years and nothing we have done to date have had any real effect on this problem. I applaud those that are thinking outside the box on this issue. And from everything that I have heard about this program, it appears to be working, as far as saving the 'hidden costs' of being homeless, all the trips to the jail, the hospital, the sobering center etc.

So I would say yes, it is a good use of our taxpayer money, a good strategy and the right thing to do.

Most of all what the homeless people out there need is a little hope and the feeling that there is someone out there that actually cares about them.

I like how "the most troublesome alcoholics are the ones who are eligible for housing" it's like a reverse reality show with booze. The more you drink and screw up your life the MORE likey you are to be oted into the house.
With little to no incentive to quit? Does anyone else see the problem here?
I work my rear end off 80+ hours a week just to afford paying the mortage and car payment's, and yet if i just throw my hands up and cry fowl, i could have a free place to stay with meal's?
And with the cost of houseing so low, there next set of appt's will probably be bigger and nicer than before.
I'm just going to quit, can I bring my wife and daughter along too? I mean we can all three become homeless alcoholics if need be.
Final word: They want a place to stay sober up, go out and get a job, actually work on getting off the street and blowing my tax dollar's.

Wow!!! I did not realize the Major thinks this is a great way to spend our tax dollars. Lets invite all the alcoholics from every city to come here so we can build some more of this housing. This is the most insane, misuse of our tax dollars.Why are we encouraging these people to continue drinking, and giving them free housing because they are alcoholics? My brother is a chronic drug user/alcoholic, and the only reason he is not on the street is because my mother takes care of him. I still feel the same way, it makes no difference. Don't spend my tax money this way Mr. Mayor.

I'm doing everything all wrong, I own a home and a small business and I can't afford to live in downtown Seattle. Do I have to just start becoming a public nusance and get to live in the city??? Why does all the public paid (taxes) issues always get put in the high priced areas IN the city. Why can't the people in charge be more aware that they would get more support for these causes if they are aware of the places for which they put these so called "helping places".So as the mayor says "we take care of all of our own" no matter "where" you are from....

I love what this world is coming to. What a brilliant message to be sending to future generations... Work hard to make a life for yourself, and have a good chunk of your own money taken to pay for people to sit around and be worthless.

Sounds remarkably like communism, to me. WAY TO GO, SEATTLE!

What a disgrace - I'm embarrassed to say that we're all paying for a program like this. Having been married to 2 alcoholics who kicked the habit, I have one important question to ask Mayor Nickels - where does personal accountability and personal choice come into this equation?

Any AA member will tell you that they had a tough choice to make to improve their lives, by quitting drinking. Giving these drunks (that refuse to improve their lives by quitting drinking) nice new places to live, only tells them that they don't need to try.

And as for the money, since when is our society ONLY about the money? What about hard-working people I know - like the single mom I hired who was on welfare and is now struggling to pay her rent working full time - who want to be responsible members of our society? Why aren't THEY the ones to get the breaks, instead of the deadbeat drunks?

Shame on you Mayor Nickels!

Why not give it a chance? Our downtown streets are now filled with drunks sleeping on the sidewalks and urinating in public places ruining the beauty and livability of our city. All other methods of dealing with this problem have failed. Jailing them doesn't work,..they just get beat up in jail then go right back out and get drunk again. Treatment has very limited success being as most hard-core drunks don't care about themselves or others and therefore reject treatment. I say try this out for a year or two and then objectively assess the effectiveness. If it doesn't work use the buildings for some other charitible purpose. If it does work bravo! maybe we're on to something. Anything is better than doing nothing and leaving downtown the way it is.

Oh, and I forgot to mention! Can everyone say.. 'ENABLING'..?

I am very much in favor of this program and I wish it was available to all chronic alsoholics, many of who are mentally ill. Ever since our Mental Hospitals closed, there has been no place for these people to be housed and we have allowed them to be homeless.

Wow! Your right Mayor we should take care of our own. We should take care of the drunks and druggies so that they are safe at night and can live comfortably in a new apartment while ignoring the working single mothers or fathers who are doing there best to make ends meet but make a dollar to much to qualify for help from any federal programs. We definetly should ignore the working families who are in danger of loosing their home to foreclosure or are in danger of having the heat shut off because they don't have enough money to pay the bills. I want to know why the Mayor doesn't just let these drunks move in with him and spare the overtaxed working comunities the bill for his big idea. Maybe its me and the Mayor is right we should provide free housing and support to the deadbeat drunk dad so he doesn't have to deal with life or his children and can continue to live happily sucking on the suds without a care in the world. Wow Mayor this is your greatest accomplishment yet, you should be really proud!!

I am a little upset and concerned by the 1811 story. I do understand the disease of addiction, homelessness, mental illness and people dealing with traumatic events.I am a member and volunteer (not a staff member) at The Recovery Cafe. I see people there struggle with obtaining adequate housing and they have and are doing the work on a daily basis to learn to live life without drugs and alcohol. I think it is great to help "The Chronic Alcoholic", but I think the city should also put some money into facilities that are at work everyday to improve peoples lives by abstinence. Let's not just reward the chronic alcoholic but also reward the alcoholic who is doing the work to recover and due to behaviors while using are penalized regarding housing etc... spread the wealth Mr. Mayor

I think it is ridiculous to give these losers a free ride. Life is hard. Being a loser is easy. I have to get up and go to work and earn a living. It makes me sick that these "poor" people that can't seem to make it on their own get a free ride. The fact is, it's a mean world out there and you have to try hard to make it in life. These losers are just looking for a free hand out, and they're getting it, not strings attached, and of course they're loving it. People have to work to live. It's no different in the animal kingdom. The lion that hunts (works) survives; the lion that lays around being a loser does not survive. Even though people might say this is "cheaper", why should society have to pay anything such as medical care for non-contributors? It's time for the boo-hoo violins to stop playing!

we definitely should support and expand this program. it is ludicrous to compare the type of person that 1811 targets with so-called "slackers" and frankly that comment just shows how uninformed, undereducated or willfully ignorant many people are regarding the facts of mental illness and addiction. what if it was one of your immediate family that would be aided from this program? would you be so cruel and mean-spirited? these people are american citizens and members of our community - and they need our help. even if 1811 did not save the taxpayers money(which it DOES) i would still support it because it is immoral and fiscally irresponsible not to.

More wasted NICKELS on this program has enabled a chosen deviant lifestyle and bled public funds from others who are much more deserving. For Greg Nickels backing of the dropping of taxpayer nickels on deviants and criminals he needs the voters boot out of office. Alcoholism is a disease which requires choice by the abuser not society. It is NOT the responsibility of society to pander to the cost of making the abuser comfortable while abusing. Alcoholism must HURT. Hurting will force the abuser to make the choice of life or death. It is the abuser's choice not the taxpayer's. Quit the enabeling/pandering and let alcoholics be free to choose for themselves. Let freedom ring. Preferably not to the sound of nickels hitting the concrete in support of this program.

This isn't anything new... might be new for the City to do. Plymouth Housing Group (www.plymouthhousing.org) in Seattle, and other low-income housing providers across the country, have been doing this sort of thing for several years. The model is one of "Harm Reduction" in which one builds a support structure around the individual which is less costly than reactionary emergency services, police response and jailing these individuals. As a "solution", it is only one of many being deployed within Seattle -- which has taken a public-private partnership approch to dealing with homelessness, one of the most extensive in the nation, involving non-profits, churches, City organizations and State organizations. Comments regarding "why aren't we doing more to help out those who are struggling" are somewhat misplaced. This isn't an "either-or" issue. Resources for going into getting chronic addicts off the streets and into housing do not detract for efforts to build up additional affordable housing... which is being done through different venues in conjunction with developers and specfic tax breaks, and rent subsidies, including Section 8 rental subsidies (which is a purely income-based need program and open to use for any rental, though most people don't know that a landlord can not legally refuse section 8 payments). Yes, there needs to be more affordable housing in Seattle. Yes, there needs to be mour solutions for getting families into stable housing. Yes, there are other problems in the City that need solutions. Does providing housing for one group take awary from other groups with need? No. Arguing such just pits victims against victims without any viable solution. How about present solutions to these other issues? "Harm Reduction" works in reducing the social and economic impact of chonric homelessness due to addiction... the alternatives have consistently been tried and, for some, work. For others, not at all.

Two words, universal healthcare. Solve the financial problem of homeless alcoholics and create a system where people are still accountable for themselves to find a place to live, through work.

I'm happy and proud to live in a city that takes care of its most vulnerable residents! NO ONE should have to live on the streets in such a rich County, especially those who suffer from the disease of alcohol addiction. We can spend millions of tax dollars to build world class sports stadiums, but its a waste of money to help a person in need? Its great we are getting our priorities straight!

1811 is a great idea. I had always thought that housing those that can't think to help themselves is the only way to keep them and society safe. I'm glad that the study confirmed my thinking.

Maybe we can also implement ideas that are out of the box for our children and keep them out of 1811. Spend the money when it can do some good.

Housing First is a brilliant and innovative approach to homelessness. The problem is that the public, by in large, will not be happy with any solution to homelessness--short of banishing homeless people from our community.

The City and Mayor's office have been increasingly tossing homeless individuals out of parks and busting up their ad-hoc "homes" on the streets. People opposed to a Housing First approach probably applaud those punitive measures. But where do you expect these individuals to go? If you don't want them sleeping on the street, in your yard, on in the local park, then give them a home.

Clearly, housing with puritanical requirements has not worked to help all homeless people find a way out of addiction or to find a way off the streets. Those programs may have a place for some and should continue to be supported as part of the solution. But let's be honest that those approaches rose to prominence not because they were good public policy, but because they were created by religious institutions and faith-based organizations.

The facts from the UW study and the other information provided by the Mayor and other supporters of Housing First show that it is good public policy. It saves tax payer money by reducing visits to the sobering center, the county jail, and the emergency center; it reduces the amount of drinking and over-drinking by residents; and it creates safer, cleaner streets for us all.

During this Up Front program Robert Mak reported the incorrect results for the Democratic Primary, He had Obama at 50% and Hillary at 47% with only a 3% margin between them.

The result at the Washington Secretary of State's website is Obama at 50.84% and Hillary at 45.74% with a 5.1% margin between them.

Shame on Mak for this careless mistake, it should be corrected on air next week.

I watched the program on the 1811 house for street people who are chronically challenged with their alcoholism and repeatedly find themselves in jail or seeking care at local emergency rooms. I applaud the concept and hope to see it spread to other facilities in the community. It seems to be a good economic and public safety alternative and is a much more humane way to deal with those who normally end up being ignored on the rough fringes of society.

This is not about people who have even the slightest chance of turning their lives around. I doubt that anyone professing a willingness to give up their own lives and turning into drunks so that they may live off others' tax money, are even close to being serious. Give up their work and responsibility and respectability? Perhaps you have to have had a drunk close to your heart to have any understanding of what the drunk and his/her family face. These guys are determined, undiscouragable terminal drunks; they haven't a chance of ever making good on anything. This is where some compassion comes in. Our tax money gets spent endlessly on those who CAN do something with their lives, and there are few who complain. This is one opportunity to ease these poor, miserable, lonely people into another world where they can find peace. And love. Nobody's loved them for a long, long time. They get a roof, a warm bed, a toilet, and their bottle. We get them off the streets and save money.

This is a pandoras' box. First in watching this program it did not identify whether this was paid for by King County taxes or State taxes? It was stated that 1/3rd of their income was used for rent. Where does this income of theirs come from? Panhandling or Government checks that also come from my tax dollars?

I being one afflicted with this disease, completly oppose this enabling idea. I know that if during my drinking days this was offered to me, I would have never stopped drinking. I also know this is the Fantasy situation I dreamed of during my addiction, because I no longer have to accept reponsibility for my actions or the life I choose to lead. And yes if I heard of this program while in another state I would immediately hitch hike to Seattle run up a tab in Washington merely so I can be considered for this program. That is the way alcoholics think. How dies this help them to become productive members of society?

Second this is directed for removing alocoholics from the streets for purely financial concerns. I am sure you could make arguements for many different subgroups within our communities that use up more resources or cost us more should also have the same help, and that if we just housed them we could also save money(Pandora), where would it end? I believe the same people who support this idea would try to incorporate everyone they felt had some defect should be incroorated into this type of program or create a similar one and use our tax dollars. I believe this would actually increase the cost of this in the future to offset any possible current savings.

Third, as we are a litigious society I believe that this will open up communities to litigation on behalf of those who feel they should have the same opportunities as these alcoholics(This will happen).they base their assesment on who is the highest financial risk for the community. I would say it is the alcoholic who chooses to get behind the wheel that cost their communities and tax payers the most.

This is a bad idea that only promotes larger government and less reponsibility for ones own life.

I also found it funny that immediately after the topic of spending tax dollars on alcoholics that the program spoke of the upcoming deficit the State will soon see based upon the spending habits of the current adminstration.

As most of us know, " too much" of anything is not good. I feel this project is "too much".

WOW! What suckers are being made of the Seattle taxpayers! Roll out the red carpet for every worthless scumbag in the country - and soon you will have a HUGE supply. San Francisco made them welcome and soon it was totally overrun. Police departments all over the country were buying them one way tickets for California's panhandler paradise. I notice your tender hearted giveaway of taxpayer money hasn't gotten those flea infested creeps off the street - nope, they are right there panhandling for "beer money!"

For heaven sake, Seattle, get smart. Your tax dollars should be going to help those who are struggling to keep their kids housed and fed...and keeping a roof over the heads of the hard working elderly who are in danger of falling between the cracks. This business of housing a bunch of drunken sots for free makes me glad I never moved back to Seattle and that I was smart enough to retire to a rural town that doesn't allow displays of public drunkenness.

I am in accord with Doug. Taxes are not too high.

That model home is extravegant, lets see if it works.

My sister says, those kinds of programs have worked so far.

I have mixed feelings. I understand the need to take care of people with a disease. As a person in recovery from alcoholism, who socializes with like minds and bodies. I wonder why there is not more support in helping those who put the work in and why continue to penalize them for behaviors/actions while in their disease. Where is their hand up Mr. Mayor? Housing for low-income, mentally ill, trauma survivors, people in recovery, single parents, I could go on and on. Why Mr. Mayor are you so blind to these worthy people? If you are such a humanitarian and "take care of our own" open up your blinders and see the extent of "taking care of our own". Don't tell me there are already programs in place, not to the extent of 1811 or the Money, and we are going to pay for more of the same? Let's start rewarding some of those who have and are doing the HARD work in recovery.

If the tax payers are going to pay for alcoholics
to sit in a warm room every night and drink why not allow drug addicts the same opportunity, let them snort, inject or smoke drugs in a warm room payed for by tax payers.

Get them all rehabitated.

And what will we propose doing for other addictive types? Arsonists? Serial Murderers? Serial Rapists? Habitual Drunk Drivers? Pedophiles? One can only imagine catering to these forms of illness in the same fashion. And what is this automatic connection between the homeless and drinking to excess? In Paradise (i.e., Hawaii) there are 8000 (yes 8 with three zeros) homeless along some of the best beach front property west of Honolulu scattered over a distance of 8 to 10 miles or more. It's not always drunkedness as many of these people simply cannot afford the price of even the cheapest housing on Oahu. I'm afraid that once again Seattle politicos have rung the Ding Dong Bell. But yet the people keep voting them in. You truly get the government you deserve.

I like the idea. It is a humane way to take care of people who are habitual drinkers or drug users. It helps the people get back on their feet with a warm, safe place to call home.

I don't understand, what about the homeless people who are actually working hard to get help and working to get their lives back, those who want to get back into society. I worked very hard for 2 years while being homeless. I applied for any housing. I eventually got housing, I recently own a business. Yes, we need to get everyone off the streets. Everyone are worthy human beings. There are so many people still sleeping on the streets. Why not add more shelters? Do both Mayor? Build low income housing and while building them, help those who need a shelter tonight. People are dying out on the street. Sometimes we forget, it might just be you and I on that street. Be grateful we have beds and a warm comforter tonight. Peace be with all of you.

Timothy is thinking clearly and is correct that the general funds should not be used to fund such a project but rather hikes in the alcohol tax. It is unreasonable to allow these folks long term support but a short term time limited stay which is linked to treatment mandatory. This is insane if it is not linked to treatment and short term.

How can we expect people to hit bottom and then fight to recover and do better in their lives if there is not a bottom. Correct me if I'm wrong but if a relative allowed them to live rent free and drink excessively would we not call this enabling? So instead of a relative it's the entire city. MUCH BETTER.

I think it is a great idea for PR for the mayor, ... but it makes no sense.

Wake up Mr. Mayor... Lets not enable drunks and druggies.

If you have the "spare" money in your budget to waste on this, use it to make available more affordable housing downtown to reward the people who work, are not drunks/druggies and want to have a positive effect on the city, economy and society. If you look at the insane prices for even the less desirable studios downtown (and the immeadiate area) you will find the avg to be anywhere from 900-1500/month.

I'm all for helping alcoholics and homeless people, and I do agree that this probably cost taxpayers less than hospital/ER visits. However, has the mayor look outside? Where is the priority?
-How many seniors having a hard time getting medical care/prescription drugs?
-How many low income people that are truly hard working, yet having problems with housing/medical care?
-How many regular hard working people, where the majority of the tax came from, struggling with standard housing?

If the mayor thinks that this is the priority instead of things I listed above, why don't he uses his own wages or cut his salary to help the funds? I vote for reduction in the mayor's paycheck to help fund the homeless and alcoholics. We're paying for both anyway, so I want my money to be used to help people instead of paying for the mayor's lifestyle.

Mayor Nichols, stop being a hypocrite. If you really want to help the alcoholics, show it by taking a reduction in your paycheck to help the taxpayers funds. Also help low income hard working people too. Stop increasing tax in disguise of these social programs and jack up your salary at the same time.

I don't understand why/how we've gotten here, except via the loss of common sense and our value of personal responsibility taken to the extreme. We as a society have some obligation to make decisions for people who are impaired and unable to make decisions for themselves - be it mental illness; addictions; mental retardation or whatever impairment makes it impossible for someone to stay safe. We have now collectively decided that we cannot impose societal will on others, even though they are making harmful, impaired decisions for themselves. Who in their RIGHT mind would WANT to drink or drug themself to death; would WANT to sleep in a doorway, or would WANT to behave in a homicidal rage? Even though in their impaired state they would tell you they do. All those behaviors are evidence of impairment. I have no problem paying for food and housing and addiction or mental health treatment, but we must take some responsibility to make decisions for those who cannot. And if that includes housing and treatment and even where and when they don't want it, I say we owe it to them to intervene.

I work 40hrs plus a week-trying to figure out away to keep our home we have been in for 19 yrs-how do we pay for medicare supplements, which I need as I am a cancer survior(and everyone needs), have oil heat which we have not used for 2 yrs as we can't afford it--but "he" is giving all expense paid booze vacations-I can see helping them, IF they want to make a change. How about making them helps others out, we could use some help around here--You don't see me out asking to hand outs!!

Nancy deserves a union scale wage that represents her fellow workers. She's been unable to keep pace with inflation. And nobody to help her, yet.

I am one of the hardworking tax paying citizens struggling to keep a roof over my head. Then the mayor uses our tax dollars to provide drunks a free place to live and two meals a day. I am outraged. These individuals made a choice, that is not my problem.

If the mayor is so concerned about "inhumanity", he should do something about the rising costs of rent from the greedy landlords. The mayor's office has done nothing about affordable housing. Soon, the only people living in this city will be the rich, drunks and drug addicts. Anyone not fitting those two descriptions, won't be able to survive.

Oh boy... some are for it, some aren't for it. I think the reality is this: it is a community problem. We have liquor stores, bars.. how is that also helping? Keep in mind... these people weren't born alcoholics. They became alcoholics thus become homeless.

Another situation: domestic violence. It is a community problem as well. Just because you see or know of someone who has been abused and say nothing about it because it isn't "your problem, you're wrong. By not saying anything, one is encouraging that they become further more abused. There are a lot of domestic violence (DV) and sexual assault (SA) agencies out there for women and children (due to statistics, women report abuse). When one or a family leaves a DV situation, what's the first thing they need to do? Find a SAFE place. Once you're in a SAFE place, then you can work on the issues. It is UP to the victim to decide.. should she return to the abuser OR not return? There IS hope.

What about the homeless and the alcoholics? They, too, need a safe place FIRST. Again, it is also UP to the alcoholic to decide... should I try to quit drinking? Should I lessen the alcohol intake? Should I continue drinking? When an alcoholic lessens the amount of drinking, that is to be PRAISED! An effort made on the alcoholic's part. Who is perfect anyway? There is ALWAYS hope. For those out in the community who think that it's hopeless, you are flat out wrong.

Same goes for sex offenders. SAFE housing FIRST!. I admire that lady that has a home for sex offenders. It shows she cares.. and she sets good boundaries.. there is hope.

We are ONE big community.. one village. We all need to come together and stop thinking about where our tax dollars are going. If a person doesn't make enough money, then that person can find a different job that pays more money. Again, there's hope for one to WANT to improve their lives by making more money.

If we want to discuss tax dollars, let's discuss the war. That's a different topic.

I'd rather have my tax dollars go to help those in need, rather than go to pay for the war.

Sigh.....

If I was in charge. I would arrest them all and put them up in work camps out in the desert. They could be planting trees and working on the roads.
I can barely afford to pay my own rent. Why should I pay for them to get drunk. This is an outrage. The first time they are caught drinking in public. They could get 1 year in a work camp. Second offense would be two years. Make them work and pay us not the other way around.

I can understand those who are upset about this project. I work at HMC and heard about this before it began and said the same things that most of you are saying now.
I work 40-60 hours a week to support my family just like you. Let's not kid ourselves, this project has NOTHING to do with trying to sober up or rehabilitate the residents. Those that live at 1811 are chronic alcoholics (sorry, no druggies, just the drunks) who will drink themselves to death. The residents are not waste to society and most have tried to stop drinking more times than you or I could imagine.
Whether you want to believe it or not, it's far cheaper and safer (to both them and us) to house them at 1811 than to let them stay on the street. The average resident would rack up a bill at Harborview alone in excess of $800,000 per year, mostly because of "Man down" calls to 911 (I love all ya good samaritans). This estimate is on the way low end by the way and just remember these guys don't pay, that's all on us, as taxpayers.
For those of you that say just let em stay on the street, why don't you stop by Harborview E.R. one cold and wet Friday or Saturday night and hang out for 5-8 hours and watch how leaving them on the street works. Why don't you ask how and why Harborview operates on a budget that's $50+ million dollars in the red every year?
HMC can't turn them away and has to see them if they present with medical complaints. Why don't you sit next to them, without complaining to Security about how they smell like urine, feces or vomit.
See there's more to this picture than most of you are allowing yourselves to see.
Again it's not about rehab it's about saving millions of dollars on a broader scale.
Before somebody reacts with an personal attack, let me tell you something.
I'm a recovering alcoholic and will be for the rest of my life.
I've been homeless, not to the point of sleeping on the street, but darn close.
I work at HMC and see these people every day.
I'm not a liberal tree hugger, actually quite the opposite. I'm a misplaced redneck who is a firm supporter of law enforcement and believe in quick, swift justice.
Most importantly I believe that everyone as an adult should take responsibility for themselves and their actions. I don't approve of enabling, but in this case, the option is just too expensive and at some point you have to be willing to look at reality.

I have worked hard for the last 40 years. I have only been unemployed for one month out of those 40 years. I have faithfully paid all my taxes and dues. However, I struggle every month to make ends meet. My son and his family work hard and struggle to makes ends meet. Why should someone who gives nothing to society get a place to sleep and food on their table for being a chronic alcoholic. If I get cancer and cannot work, will the City of Seattle and the taxpayers pay for a home for me and food? THIS IS ATROCIOUS!

I actually saw Robert Mak's program on TV last weekend while I was waiting for the Oscars to start and I must say that he missed a big piece of this story. The residence is the first of many that are part of the 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness program.

I think he was also way too concerned with the enabling aspect of the story (as are a lot of posters to this strand) as the reality is that the city/county/state government saves millions of dollars because of this building. Chronically homeless people are extremely expensive with all their police, court, hospitals, and emergency services they wrack up.

The decision has been made to start various houses for various problem populations and this is just the beginning. Crack & heroin addicts, meth users, and the mentally ill are next and will have a lot more ethical questions to overcome before they go into housing.

The mayor is showing real leadership by backing this program. This building is a step in the right direction and something that we should be proud to support. If you'd rather sweep city problems under the rug, the troubles surrounding homelessness will only get worse.

Gabe,

You are right, when I posted I focused mainly on enabling, however this program does not stop these people from having go to the hospital, jail, or mental institutions it only allows them a roof over their heads for now. I would say start a oversight and see how much these citizens cost us this year i.e. how many hospital visits in the next year.

I would concede that it will probably save the tax payers some money, now, however in the longrun it will cost us more. The same people who like this program will add more dysfunctional groups of people who need the same kind of assitance, where will it stop?

When the hard working citizens of Washington no longer can live here due to the rising costs imposed by government to fund these types of programs, and out of state or country companies no longer find Washington a viable answer to start businesses to bring jobs to the area due to taxation. And companies like Boeing and Microsoft see the benefits of other States not taxing like Washington and start creating jobs elsewhere or moving their comapnies, maybe we will see that a socialized Washington government is not viable. This of course leaves the Government less money so they have to cut jobs too and they have to ask for more tax dollars with bills such as SB6900 (engine size and CO2 tax), new toll roads (supposedly global warming) and who knows what else they will come up with?

I would say for this who wish this program to continue start a non-profit and use private donations to support this endeavor.

I actually like the idea that some of my tax dollars will end up in the hands of the less fortunate. I've always believed that is one of the responsibilities of government.

But I would feel a lot better if they were working for the money. So they can't find work anywhere? Instead of taking my money and just giving it to them in the form of apartments and food, create jobs with this money, and make them do some kind of work to improve our city in return for the benefits they are getting.

And another thing: If we give them a place to live and food, then all the money people give them for their begging can't be spent on alcohol. So they might well end up the emergency room MORE often and not less...

I have a son who is a alcoholic,for years i enabled him to be a drunk, gave him a place to live,fed him ,even did his laundry.he had some jobs and could never keep them,finally i threw him out (he was 27 years old then) he went to jail and i helped him again things didn't get better so i threw him out again this time i told him not to call me if he goes to jail,told him to find his own way, he bounced around ,slept in shelters or on the street,he lived like that for 6 years, now he has a job and has been taking Care of himself for the last 3 years and he calls me almost everyday and has thanked me for NOT helping him and making him do it himself,tough love,not a handout works better, I'm glad we didn't live there,my son would still be a drunk loser,how sad. someone said teach a man to fish ,feed him for a lifetime, buy him a fish, feed him for a day .i'm so proud of my son now ,i taught him to fish.

i think waste tax money for that!!! those people useless in society. they never learn....!

Yes, it is enabling. I think they should be working off the rent somehow. They should be doing something, even if only picking up aluminum cans off the street for 8 hours a day, and keeping the cash-in value. That would be doing something to improve the community. As for the people that claim they have to work 80+ hours a week to pay the 2 car payments, house payment and boat note, you chose to get in debt like that.

I think this housing is ridiculous. I fully understand alcoholism because I have grown up with them in my family. I'd rather they were being housed at a rehab. If their not willing to make an effort toward changes in their life why should the public help them? With every action their is a consequence. Their consequence shouldn't be free housing in downtown Seattle. I can't even afford to live in downtown Seattle! If we are, as a society, going to give these few a free place to live, shouldn't we give all of the homeless, regardless of circumstance, somewhere to live?

I am a retired man who lives in Ballard, and am registered to vote here. I support the mayor in this 100%. I am behind this program, and favor all, and every, effort to alleviate homelessness. Thank you for reporting and explaining this program. Please ignore the comments of obviously petulant, selfish, and immature people. Grown men and women with normal probity support the mayor's efforts fully..

A wise man once said, "If I accept you as you are, I will make you worse; however if I treat you as though you are what you are capable of becoming, I help you become that." - Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe

The financial burden of our city's homeless, regardless of the why, doesn't just lie with the city or state. It doesn't just affect the homeless person, either. It affects their parents, children, siblings, and loved ones who, in many cases, have spent thousands of dollars and hours trying to rescue them at some point. That is what is happening to me. I am a single mother of four children with two disabled parents. One has a mental disability and the other a physical disability. I had to take a second mortgage out on my house and stop working to care for them. In the past year and a half it has cost me almost everything I have. If I don't find proper housing and care for my parents within the next 30 days, I will have to sell my home just to stay afloat financially. My children are lonely and stressed as they watch mommy run around like a maniac trying to save grandma and grandpa. My brother and his wife, along with their two young children suffer with the emotional strain and pain as well.

We all pay taxes for things we may not agree with, but if we spend any money in this city, state,or country, it should be for compassionate humanitarian programs which do not discriminate. "The greatest revolution of our generation is the discovery that human beings, by changing the inner attitudes of their minds, can change the outer aspects of their lives." - William James

I am so grateful to our Mayor for giving hope to the hopeless. People who, more often than not, only need a ray of light to find the path to change. A light which shines from compassionate intelligence, and a change that blesses not just the individual in need, but their entire family and loved ones.

What about an idea like this: Incacerate the homeless/alcholics if they dont meet certain civil credentials. Do a rehabiltitation program in jail. Have a panel of recovered(ing) alcoholics judge progress. Then do something like electric home monotoring for while. For reoffenders, double jail time.

I think this is an outrage! I see the benefit in potentially saving 2.5 million a year by providing a $14k service a year. But ultimately we are taking individuals who decided not to service us "the people" and community. So we take in the 75 most expensive bumbs in the city and tell them this is acceptable behvior and the city of seattle is here to help serve your pointless non productive life with money that funds the productive community with positive motion ie. education, transportation, and anything else that helps drive the community to make this place stronger. In my opinion the people who go to the ER should suffer the consequences they chose in the same place they chose to make the decision to consume alcohol. The problem with this solution is we the productive members of society are supporting people that don't want to be here nor help.

Apart from the financial savings, the humanity factor here is priceless. Way to go Seattle! Too many of the goody-goody programs have strings attached that just dont work for the recipients, creating a threatening place that can be taken away if they dont follow the rules. Relapses are part of life, but here they can get back to life on their own timetable. There should be more of these programs for my tax dollars. Yes I have a job, own a home and pay my way.

I'm all for the housing. Speaking as someone who was in AA for 8 1/2 years, I know how it works. AA and NA help some if you know how to play the game and adhere to the unspoken rules. I was molested in AA, I was discriminated against in AA because of my color, my sexual orientation, and gender.
AA and NA exploit the so-called disease of alcohol and drugs. They use a persons past and their weak state to incert their desire into the individual.
Many in these groups are child molestors, rapists, murders, embezzelers, and racists.
In this environment a person can be revictimized. Especially if they do not conform.
Alcohol is but a symptom. AA and NA people are not qualified to address PTSD, child abuse survivors, rape victims, etc. I for one was told by a white woman it was my fault I was molested. When my Grandmother died a group of "recovering" white women told me that was my fault too. Instead of practicing what they preach about making amends they excused their actions and said I had a problem with anger. A lot of manipulation goes on in these groups. The police are not allowed in these clubs so, if your daughter or son are violated there you won't receive help.
Just because you are clean and sober does not mean you suddenly become psychologically fit.
In this country we demonize victims and raise up predators. We give them a safe place to fester and infect the rest of the community.
These people, me included, are not evil. Giving them a safe space is a fantastic idea. Let them come to a conclusion as to what is good for them. Love them and let them be themselves without having to be subjected to a person in a position of unearned authority and a sick mind telling them what to do with their life.
I began drinking again when I finally realized it wasn't the alcohol but the abuse in my life which includes the stint in AA. When I sought on my OWN to get help and heal in those areas, everything else came together. I do not talk to AA members and do not put up with their self-righteous and racist behavior.
I'm graduating with a B.A. in communications.

Would you people quit whining about your tax dollars already? You're not dumping more than a few cents into this project. If you want to complain about where your tax dollars are going, you can start with the White House. Trillions in debt, a war based on bogus intelligence and tax giveaways to companies like Exxon who are gouging you at the pumps. If you only knew what a tiny slice of the total budget supports these social programs you'd change your tune. If you want taxes to hurt less, you're barking up the wrong tree. The real welfare cheats are companies like KBR and Halliburton who get no-bid contracts and provide our service men and women with slapped together facilities with faulty electrical systems that short out on the plumbing and kill soldiers while they're trying to take a shower.

Who needs integrity anymore? Why go to college? Work hard? Instead, people should just move to Seattle and waste their lives away so that they can get free rent. Niiiiice.

Why do I have to spend 20.00 for a replacement vehicle plate and 4.00 for reflectorization when my current plates are perfectly fine? The manufacturing, handling, and distribution costs are an unneeded expense for The State. Funds for road, street, and highway maintenance, should be accessed to the value of the vehicle, not across the board to everyone, regardless of Tim Eiman’s initiatives. I am a retiree with a limited income, driving a 19 year old compact and find it unfair to pay the same amount as the lady down the street who drives by my house a dozen times a day in a Cadillac Escalade with jackrabbit acceleration after every stop.

This place is not a waste. Imagine the mountains of Pakistan.

This place is ridiculous, we work three jobs between the both of us, have two kids and still struggle each month, why should we have to pay for these people? Most of them are capable of getting a job,they can quit drinking if they want... it takes just as much effort to walk the streets begging for money as it does having a regular job...
Sign us up for a free place to live where we can drink as much as we want....we would to have no worries or bills each month!

Seattle and their stupid-hippie politicians, doing stupid, counter-intuitive, hippie things. Friggin RETARDS.

I like how some say "I'm a 'victim' of alcohol." You picked up the stupid bottle...! Be a responsible person about it!

Lock them up. Take away their alcohol, or put them in the trash. They are trying to recycle.

I think that this approach will not be a popular one among Seattle residents but the hard decisions are never easy. The bottom line is that if the city must pay twice as much or more per person when they are on the streets, then it makes good financial sence for the city to continue this program. I think we can all agree that we need the city to make good financial decisions with our tax dollars, so lets suport the city when that happens like this test program. It is not about enabeling alcoholics; it is established that (these people are going to drink) and if they dont have a home they end up in the hospital or the drunk tank. So why not just have them sent to their home while saving the cith 40 to 50 percent of the cost of caring for these people. SOPORT WHAT WORKS SEATTLE!!