What are the economic realities of addressing homelessness through permanent supportive housing?

PSH actually saves the community money, while also providing solutions and effective services for those facing the circumstance of being unhoused.  

1. PSH at 1811 Eastlake was opened in 2005 and houses 75 formerly homeless residents with chronic alcohol use disorders.  Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published research in 2009 that said 1811 Eastlake saved taxpayers $4M+ in the first year of operation. (JAMA research on 1811)
2. The JAMA also noted that the cost of publicly-funded services (jail, hospital, detox, EMS, etc.) per person per month, prior to housing, was $4,000+ per person.  The monthly cost dropped to less than $1500 per resident after 6 months of housing at 1811 and dropped down to under $1000 after 12 months of housing.  So the cost-burden on publicly-funded services drops dramatically when PSH is implemented.  (JAMA research on 1811)
3. Hotels are a much more affordable option: “The average cost to build permanent supportive housing is about $350K to $400K per unit or more, depending on where it is being built. In comparison, purchasing hotels during a depressed market is averaging around $270K per unit, a significant savings. Equally important, they are available for occupancy with very little renovation and are already furnished. Once the provider has been chosen and staffing is in place, the hotels can provide housing quickly and efficiently. HTH meets a critical need for this region.” (HTH FAQs)
   
    

So, to recap, community members are healthier, safer, more stable, and better able to plan for their future when in permanent supportive housing.  They are also far less likely to move from PSH to unstable or unhoused conditions.  And it saves taxpayers money.  

Contact Kirkland City Council to remind them of the economic benefits of PSH!
 

Want to review the info from our last PSH post? Find it here.  

This is the feedback Indivisible Kirkland gave to the city of Kirkland when it was considering body cameras in spring 2022.

Overview

Indivisible Kirkland recognizes that the issue of body-worn cameras for police is a challenging community issue, because both research and the recommendations of our trusted partner organizations have been changing so rapidly.

Research

When the first study of body cameras came out in 2012, it seemed they could be a panacea for both police violence and community trust in policing. We wish that early promise had panned out! However, subsequent research failed to replicate those benefits.

Large meta-analyses of all controlled trials of body cameras were published in 2020 and 2021. Both studies found that body cameras had no statistically significant effect on:

• use of force
• assaults on officers
• arrests
• calls for service (officer-initiated or dispatched )
• traffic tickets
• stop & frisks
• incident reports
• response time
• time on scene

Body cameras did reduce complaints against officers, by nearly 17%. It is unclear whether these were frivolous complaints or not. They also increase police citations (non-traffic) by about 6%.

Research therefore does not support body cameras as a solution either to police violence or to community lack of trust in police.

In more anecdotal terms, this makes sense if we consider that the proliferation of body cameras between 2012 and 2020 clearly failed to “fix” American policing. Body cameras were worn during the murders of Derek Chauvin and Breonna Taylor. The mere presence of a body camera does not translate into community safety.

Trusted partner organizations

Because of all this, many of our trusted organizations stopped supporting body cameras by the summer of 2020, if they supported them at all.

• The ACLU and Campaign Zero explicitly oppose starting new body cam programs.
• It is not part of Eight Can’t Wait, whose recommendations KPD has relied on before.
• The Movement for Black Lives has never asked for body cams.
• Body cams are not in the NAACP’s policy platform.
• Neither Black Lives Matter Seattle/King County nor The Washington Coalition for Police Accountability asks for body cams.

These organizations all do have specific policy demands around policing. They consistently ask for policy changes that will protect vulnerable populations by decreasing the scope and footprint of policing, and by creating robust systems of accountability. These organizations are not asking cities to increase the budgets and surveillance capabilities of their police departments. 

Specific Policy Feedback:

It is therefore Indivisible Kirkland’s strong recommendation that the city of Kirkland not purchase body cameras. It is an expensive program with serious ramifications for community members’ privacy, and it has no proven benefits to the community.

If Kirkland does enact a body-worn camera program, we do want to offer some feedback for that potential program:

• The program should not expand the size or budget of the police department; instead, positions and duties should be covered from within the current department. (We note that dismantling the SRO program could pay for a body camera program, for example.)
• Privacy issues, especially for youth and those with mental health conditions, must be of paramount importance.
• Officers must be held accountable for having their cameras on at all appropriate times.
• Officers involved in use of force and deadly force must give their statements before having access to the video.
• A civilian oversight board must have access to unedited camera footage and the authority to act upon concerning footage. 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Indivisible Kirkland (@indivisiblekirkland)

The LWSD is, frankly, doing a terrible job protecting BIPOC teachers and staff, especially those who are creating anti-racist classrooms. The district’s own Equity & Family Engagement page calls for bold, anti-racist teaching, for disrupting the status quo in education, but teachers who do so are being targeted.

You can help by:

1. Resharing these slides on social media!
   • Share our Facebook post!
   • Retweet us!
   • You can share our Instagram post by using a third party app such as Repost, or by downloading our Instagram slides and posting them yourself!
     
2. Writing the school board and administration before 3 pm Monday to have your letter part of the meeting’s public record!
   
3. You can also make a live comment to the school board; just email djenkins@lwsd.org before 1 pm Monday and tell her you want to speak, and she will send you a Zoom link.

Check out Indivisible Kirkland’s Letter of Support: Protect Teachers:

LWSD Equity Case Study: Events at Eastlake High School Leading up to 9/11/21

Introduction: 

The following is an examination of the events leading to the controversy at Eastlake High School around 9/11/21.  These events caused and continue to cause great harm to BIPOC students and staff. This is an example of situations that happen in schools across the district and missed opportunities for district leadership to support building staff and the BIPOC community.  These events illustrate why the district needs a) an equity policy at board level, which it did not have until very recently; b) a bold anti-racist administrative equity policy crafted with the help of BIPOC stakeholders; c) district-level and administrative support for building level equity teams, which involve BIPOC students, families, and staff.  

Continue reading here.

(LWSD Equity Now is a grassroots community group, of which Indivisible Kirkland is a part, that is working on equity issues in the Lake Washington School District. For more information on LWSD Equity Now, contact info@ikwa.info and we will point you in the right direction.)