You can almost sympathize with Seattle property owners. Without more robust revenue at the state level, King County and cities like Seattle are left to fund much needed services and resources through some of the few funding sources they can access. Wednesday morning, the Seattle City Council’s Finance and Housing Committee is hearing a briefing on efforts to create a new “regional network” of emergency mental health care centers with a new property tax levy to power the plan to create the five centers.
“The levy would create behavioral health crisis care centers – somewhere for people to go when they urgently need help – which our region currently lacks,” a council brief sent to media reads.
CHS reported here in September on King County Executive Dow Constantine’s proposal for an April ballot measure that would go into effect in 2024 if approved and would cost the median-value homeowner around an estimated $121 a year for nine years. The levy could raise as much as $1.25 billion through 2032 to fund construction of the five crisis care centers and increase services in the county.
In Wednesday’s presentation (PDF) from county Department of Community and Human Services director Leo Flor, officials make the case that “Families and People in Crisis” need “places to go for help instead of waiting for a crisis to occur or get worse” while law enforcement and first responders “need better, more equitable, and faster options than jail and emergency rooms.”
Flor says Mobile Crisis Teams are also need “access to places where people in crisis can get immediate help when outreach is not enough.”
Officials have not said where the new crisis facilities might be located. “Crisis Care Centers would be sited by providers proposing sites with host jurisdiction support through an RFP or a similar procurement process,” the presentation reads.
The Crisis Care Centers would be operated by provider agencies under contract to DCHS’s Behavioral Health and Recovery Division.
In addition to the new centers, the plan would include increased funding for the “recruitment and retention of the community behavioral health workforce,” and boost the number of “residential treatment beds” available in the county.
Officials are continuing to plan for an April 2023 countywide vote on the levy. That would be the second important ballot of the year for Seattle voters — later this month, ballots will be mailed for a special February election to decide on I-135, an initiative that would create a new public developer “to build, acquire, own, and manage social housing” in Seattle.
The full city council presentation on the Crisis Care Centers proposal is below:
HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
Where is the evidence King County knows how to mitigate this huge problem they helped create? $1.2 billion? How about start with one successful crisis center and then ask us for more?
> You can almost sympathize with Seattle property owners. Without more robust revenue at the state level, King County and cities like Seattle are left to fund much needed services and resources through some of the few funding sources they can access.
Did you miss that WA had a $15 BILLION budget surplus in 2022?
This will pass and I will definitely support it.
For years it’s felt as though we were waiting for state or federal govt to be saviors — they clearly haven’t been.
Because of this, the proposal from the county is years behind the curve. That said, it feels directionally correct and the best time to make up for lost time is to start immediately.
Some concerns: the slide deck says we need 7 new facilities to get to 2018 baseline, but mentions building only 5, with no concrete plan until future legislation after voters approve funding. But what we had in 2018 wasn’t enough. Siting and staffing 5 facilities will be a major challenge, beyond financial resources. Let’s hope the county can get it done.
I feel like Seattle could use 5 themselves, and 7 for King County seems like bare-bones, but this is at least a start. The current patchwork providing emergency mental health services is deplorable and we need to reflect as a society on what we have allowed to happen across the country in the wake of gutting and privatizing social services
Until all visible homelessness is addressed, we need to do any/everything.
This will raise rents, this will raise the burden on homeowners.
However, compared to the rampant issues with drugs, theft, harassment, and others that happen alongside homelessness, that’s literally a small price to pay
I have one question about this: Will this program include mandatory participation by those on our streets with obvious mental illness, or will the individuals be allowed to say “no thanks” by denying services? This scenario is often in play when outreach workers offer shelter to homeless people, by shunning such offers and continuing to live outdoors, with all the social consequences on themselves and our neighborhoods.
I hope you’re ready to help advocate for funding for this mandatory participation…
FYI, from the presentation at the city council public assets and homelessness committee meeting yesterday there’s about three times as many referrals to shelters as there are placements because there isn’t shelter space. It also sounds like about 2 in 5 refuse shelter (which is typically just an overnight shelter, which they are very likely referred to again in the future), and a large number of those are because they want private space for their belongings over the temporary space of a shelter.
Property owners should not be the only payer for a societal problem. There should be a more equitable way to fund this definitely needed service where everyone in Washington benefits