(Download the PDF version of this summary)

Should the Coalition support the creation of large safe sites, if the opportunity to create them happens?
Group Discussion Summary • Tacoma Pierce County Coalition to End Homelessness • 8.19.2

The general answer from the discussion groups is a qualified “Yes,” although broad concern exists regarding safety and manageability of large sites.

• It depends on how it Is done seems to be part of our answer.
• Needs to be done right and we should be in the conversation.
• Unit costs come down by building more in one place.
• There are more people to assist concentrated in one spot.
• The more sites, the better. The faster we move people out of homelessness, the better. Too long in homelessness often results in loss of hope.
• We should embrace any opportunity to increase shelter; having a home base is far better than being on the street.
• We need safe sites because many car campers are families trying to stay together. There is a lack of family shelters and the recent feedback I received is that the one we have isn't necessarily safe.
• There are many women who camp in their cars, too due to personal safety issues.
• Discussion of the hidden costs of a large site that might mitigate savings from economies of scale. Issues with substance use and mental health management for 28 people at FOB are daunting. What happens with 200-300? Needs to be adequately resourced with adequate staffing to provide 24/7 crisis management.
• Do smaller encampments, are bigger sites safe? Do we want them? Combination?
• Larger sites are generally more violent. While large sites are needed, smaller is preferable.
• Concern that large sites poorly done can be more like an internment camp than a healing community.
• Self-managed? How supporting – garbage/sewer, services/supports?
• Larger sites are ok, but with wrap around services and assistance in making plans for the future.
• Sanctioned encampments need to foster sense of ownership and community to be healing, regardless of the size.
• Needs to be subgroups building community and implementing ownership.
• Must be organized with common spaces and resident involvement.
• Need sites for RVs and cars but do not know the optimal size for these.
• We all agreed that moving people around does not work and lastly, the people who are needing safe sites should have a say so in what happens and what would be helpful.
• We need one large site in the county, services spread out over the county and in Tacoma, more sites modeled after the Veterans Village.
• Need sites for specific populations, note that recently unhoused people are families, elderly (ha!), young adults.
• County is looking for support for Community First Village and coming at that topic through the back door instead of being honest.
• Need a diversity of sizes, spreading out and offering options around the county instead of centering only in Tacoma.
• Talked about how the barracks model allows for different floors or rooms that focus on different needs.
• Should be modeling with more specific populations in mind.
• Need sites for specific populations, note that recently unhoused people are families, elderly, young adults.
• Need to address impacts on nearby neighbors and be mindful of what nearby neighbors want and will allow.
• City ordinances – can you call it a shelter? Stabilization? City building/permitting issues.
• Was this for structures or encampments? Infrastructure issues – sewer connections, paving, etc.
• Need to encourage direct community outreach.
• How can things be done more quickly? With urgency!

Notable News: Trump supports moving homeless people to camps in outlying areas - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/08/16/trump-speeches-extreme-agenda-2024-bid/