Read on Twitter
Mercer Island City Council meeting is live
Appearances (comments) scheduled for 6pm, and agenda item #9 (the vote on banning "camping") is sometime after that during the 'regular business' portion. Agenda link in QT.
#SeattleProtests #PugetProtests https://twitter.com/lelulololol/status/1361408455953637379
Appearances (comments) scheduled for 6pm, and agenda item #9 (the vote on banning "camping") is sometime after that during the 'regular business' portion. Agenda link in QT.
#SeattleProtests #PugetProtests https://twitter.com/lelulololol/status/1361408455953637379
They're just wrapping up the Annual Financial & Accountability Audit Exit Conference. One council member brought up that this past years audit cost $74k + "travel costs", and next one will cost $88k.
Mercer Island population: 25,000
Seattle: 724,305
Bellevue: 144,403
Mercer Island population: 25,000
Seattle: 724,305
Bellevue: 144,403
Mercer Island Mayor Wong noting that there are a number of people wishing to speak during the appearance portions, so they're moving up the City Manager's report on the agenda to keep the 6pm start time for those public comments.
69 people registered to speak !!
They're taking a recess for 10 minutes till 6pm when appearances start.
The City Clerk reminding people that if their zoom name isn't the same as the name/phone number/email that they signed up with they won't be able to speak.
They're taking a recess for 10 minutes till 6pm when appearances start.
The City Clerk reminding people that if their zoom name isn't the same as the name/phone number/email that they signed up with they won't be able to speak.
1st comment from a mom/dog owner/background in social services in support of the ordinance, stating "this is an Issue for Mercer Island residents only, all testimony from non-mercer island residents is fraudulent"
Note: this ordinance displaces people to other cities.
Note: this ordinance displaces people to other cities.
2nd comment is another in favor of the ordinance.
"Mercer Island is the last city in our region to adopt anti-camping ordinances [...] Seattle has not and the results are clearly displayed [...] we do not want our public spaces to look like Seattle public spaces"
"Mercer Island is the last city in our region to adopt anti-camping ordinances [...] Seattle has not and the results are clearly displayed [...] we do not want our public spaces to look like Seattle public spaces"
3rd comment is another in favor.
Paraphrasing: the parks are protected now but not the sidewalks/trails which need to be protected from "the camping situation" citing "walking the streets of Seattle" as a reason to support this ordinance.
Paraphrasing: the parks are protected now but not the sidewalks/trails which need to be protected from "the camping situation" citing "walking the streets of Seattle" as a reason to support this ordinance.
4th comment another in favor, cites Seattle's lawlessness.
5th is also in favor, cites the overarching problem of not feeling safe to bring kids to Seattle parks.
6th also in favor, following suit "one needs only to look across the water" (to Seattle).
5th is also in favor, cites the overarching problem of not feeling safe to bring kids to Seattle parks.
6th also in favor, following suit "one needs only to look across the water" (to Seattle).
7th is more longtime residents in favor, saying the same things about lawlessness, but instead of citing Seattle they cite they're observations of Olympia "but things have slipped markedly downward for downtown Olympia"
8th is in favor, saying this ordinance will shine a light on the homelessness problem by way of law enforcement? (to get data that way to then allocate funding)?
An extremely costly methodology and wholly unnecessary. Non-police organizations already exist for this purpose.
An extremely costly methodology and wholly unnecessary. Non-police organizations already exist for this purpose.
9th is a student against the ordinance! Calling it unethical and illogical citing a very specific number of known locals experiencing homelessness, some of whom work and attend island schools and no clear guideline on how far away open shelters can be to be considered "available"
10th has worked closely with parks picking up litter and trash at encampments. I couldn't get a clear read on if they were for or against, but mentioned delaying the vote.
11th is in favor naming previous commentators echoing their support. Calling this ordinance "humane" and stating "the off-island voices you may hear tonight won't have to live with the consequences of your vote"
Once again, displacement does just that.
Once again, displacement does just that.
12th is in favor, says the ordinance is "humane"
13th is in favor but says the "ordinance is too lenient", says Martin vs. Boise doesn't apply to MI because "we have many shelter beds available in cities around us" and a lot of other really harsh myths around homelessness.
13th is in favor but says the "ordinance is too lenient", says Martin vs. Boise doesn't apply to MI because "we have many shelter beds available in cities around us" and a lot of other really harsh myths around homelessness.
14th is against the ordinance asking to delay the vote saying that homelessness effects BIPOC people disproportionately and congregate shelters heightened risk for covid exposure. Asking to postpone the vote, and clear misunderstandings surrounding the issue of homelessness.
15th is a family member of the previous speaker and is also is against/asking to delay the vote "so our faith/community leaders can come up with a community based solution" [vs law enforcement] also citing they city risks litigation enforcing this w/o a shelter on the island.
16th had tech difficulties and disconnected.
17th is a breath of fresh air. Against the ordinance saying to delay the vote.
Started with a statement from State Senator Lisa Wellman, requesting a 90 day postponement of the vote for further deliberation and community discussion.
(1/2)
Started with a statement from State Senator Lisa Wellman, requesting a 90 day postponement of the vote for further deliberation and community discussion.
(1/2)
Cont'd on to address the tone/dialog around this issue in the community, "if you replaced 'homeless' with any minority group that we would all be appalled with what we're hearing" continuing to say that compassion would be involving those affected/advocates in this convo (2/2)
19th is in favor of the ordinance, recounts a family member's experience with addiction who was faced with "jail or getting help" and saying the Seattle/Portland/SF are examples of cities not addressing the crisis. Oof.
20th is in favor of the ordinance, saying that "the homelessness problem" will increase on Mercer Island with the addition of the light rail citing their experience in Santa Monica.
21st saying to hold the vote for 90 days for it to be reviewed and strengthened, isn't sure that this ordinance is even legal because of the lack of guaranteed shelter on the island or specific language in the ordinance about distance/transportation to shelters to outside cities.
22nd is against the ordinance and has a background working with people experiencing homelessness and family with mental health struggles; they're expanding on the stressful conditions & mental impact shelter scenarios can have, one of many misunderstandings surrounding the issue.
23rd wants to move the vote on this to may 28th for the community to discuss if this is the best fit for the and if there are alternatives. Specifically mentioning concern about the ordinance's outline of vehicle camping saying that it'll be used to further target BIPOC people.
24th supports the ordinance.
25th supports, citing "awful human tragedy in Seattle" and specifically the Ballard neighborhood, also saying that not having services on MI "strands" people on the island.
25th supports, citing "awful human tragedy in Seattle" and specifically the Ballard neighborhood, also saying that not having services on MI "strands" people on the island.
26th is for the ordinance, saying many "frame MI residents as selfish and uncaring" "'do MI residents have any compassion' someone posted on nextdoor" saying many are on non-profit boards and give money to orgs like Mary's Place saying they're giving by way of property taxes.
27th is for the ordinance "from a place of empathy" and cites "whats happened in Seattle"
28th had tech difficulties.
28th had tech difficulties.
29th asking to delay the vote by 90 days to reevaluate and discuss alternative solutions the ordinance to better reflect the city's proclamation of inclusion from 8 months ago.
proclamation: https://www.mercerisland.gov/citycouncil/page/city-council-issues-proclamation-diversity-equity-and-inclusion
proclamation: https://www.mercerisland.gov/citycouncil/page/city-council-issues-proclamation-diversity-equity-and-inclusion
30th I think was in favor, says that it's for camping specifically and that the issues of homelessness and addiction are much larger than this vote.
31st gave his whole address wtf. Is in favor, citing failed policies of Seattle/SF/NYC (all *massive* cities in comparison)
31st gave his whole address wtf. Is in favor, citing failed policies of Seattle/SF/NYC (all *massive* cities in comparison)
32nd is concerned with the ordinance and wants to delay the vote by 90 days, cites the chaos in Seattle/Olympia but that both cities also have ordinances too, and wants to work with neighbors to actually get at the problems.
33rd is for the ordinance saying Seattle politics followed her from Seattle to Mercer Island.
34th saying to delay the vote and that despite the concern in previous comments about off-island opinions, that many on-island voices are asking to delay and the ordinance superficially claims compassion, asking to gather experts and advocates before passing it.
35th is in favor of passing to "get this vote behind us"
36th is in favor and picking apart Martin v. Boise. https://nlchp.org/supreme-court-martin-v-boise/
36th is in favor and picking apart Martin v. Boise. https://nlchp.org/supreme-court-martin-v-boise/
37th begins by asking the council to take a moment to think about hardships in their lives and how without certain resources how much worse it could have been. They're against the ordinance and says it will cause harm as written and has excluded people from the conversation.
38th urges a delay on the vote for more community discussion and to bring in experts, shares the views of previous comments that this is systemic issue.
39 disconnected.
40th is in favor. Doesn't want Mercer Island public spaces to be like Seattle. Concerned about increased access to MI via light rail. Says MPD is compassionate.
41 & 42 both disconnected. (69 signed up and each get 3~ minutes to speak, long night)
40th is in favor. Doesn't want Mercer Island public spaces to be like Seattle. Concerned about increased access to MI via light rail. Says MPD is compassionate.
41 & 42 both disconnected. (69 signed up and each get 3~ minutes to speak, long night)
43 is in opposition to the ordinance which would criminalize camping, using the criminal justice system to punish the most vulnerable for being vulnerable calling the ordinance harmful and lazy.
44th requests a delay on the vote in order for proper vetting and more input from community leaders with expertise in the area.
41st is back. AGAINST. Executive Director of the KC Coalition on Homelessness 
sharing bluntly that there is not shelter space in the community despite what many think, and dispelling many other myths perpetuated by this ordinance/conversation. http://homelessinfo.org/ 
sharing bluntly that there is not shelter space in the community despite what many think, and dispelling many other myths perpetuated by this ordinance/conversation. http://homelessinfo.org/
42nd is back, AGAINST. They're a mental health provider quoting an unnamed council member (the mayor requested no one be singled out) calling a previous statement about homelessness reductive. Saying instead of criminalizing not seeking shelter, working to understand why.
45th is a former WA supreme court clerk and has worked with KC Coalition on Homelessness, urging a delay. Has seen ordinances like this in 72 other WA cities, is concerned about broad-strokes prejudice, that the law doesn't work, and that its a tremendous drain on resources.
46th says "rejection of the ordinance is the minimum." Brought up specific costs of bus fair on MI routes and cost prohibitive solutions. Asking council to cite examples of this law working in other cities (previous speaker made it pretty clear that evidence doesn't exist).
47th says "don't pass this ordinance" and that council is "looking to get rid of them [people experiencing homelessness]" and complimented the youth who have spoken tonight with compassion.
Hell yeah, I agree wholeheartedly, the youth are keepin me afloat through this mtg.
Hell yeah, I agree wholeheartedly, the youth are keepin me afloat through this mtg.
48th ceded time to their partner #47.
49th is in favor. Parroting a lot of anti-homeless myths.
49th is in favor. Parroting a lot of anti-homeless myths.
50th is against the ordinance saying it criminalizes homelessness, saying Black & Indigenous people are disproportionately living unhoused making this a racially biased policy. Citing the median household income of MI at ~$150k saying "a $1000 fine might seem trivial to you"
51st also said his whole address wtfff. In favor.
52nd is a student, and against! Asking to delay the vote 90 days to rethink. Bringing up that people in favor have been working 6 months, people against have only known for 2 weeks that this was even a thing. I wish I captured their full statement, hell yeah youth.
53rd is from Seattle, and offering a message to the meeting. Started with a kudos to the youth speakers tonight. Cites 12k people sleeping outside in it in King County, saying we have the resources to house them and that the convo never focuses on the PEOPLE experiencing this.
54th asking to delay the vote, saying it costs $50k a year to keep someone homeless, whereas housing them only costs $20k. Continuing, housing is the right solution citing a project in Bellevue (didn't catch the name), and that criminalizing homelessness is costly and inhumane.
55th disconnected.
56th gave another whole address, yall need opsec yesterday. In favor.
57th is in favor, claiming compassion saying things like "Seattle is a case study" and "promoting the migration of Seattle's homeless to Mercer Island" yuck.
56th gave another whole address, yall need opsec yesterday. In favor.
57th is in favor, claiming compassion saying things like "Seattle is a case study" and "promoting the migration of Seattle's homeless to Mercer Island" yuck.
58th is in favor. Saying words like "filth" and mentioned people camping at Cal Anderson "we all saw what happened" and fear that "bad apples would cross the bridge to Mercer Island and ransack the town" and now attributing random crimes to homelessness.
59th is a from Seattle offering words. "yalls policies affect us too" because theres no shelter on MI. Not getting a sense of solidarity, but instead pity & fear. "You are a part of the world, its not kind of you to give them away you ought not to have as much in the first place"
60th is a hatecrime survivor of White residents of Mercer Island. Citing that council voted against the MFTE (multi family tax exemption, i hope i'm getting that correct) that would attract developers to build affordable, calling several other policies racist and biased.
