OUR POSITION: Right Idea WRONG LOCATION

Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on the proposed micro city. Thank you also for slowing the reckless pace of the Executive’s Office to ram this through without the Council’s thorough review, without community input (community engagement was schedule after their requested release of funding), and with their disregard of the zoning laws and environmental damage this village will cause.

As Councilmember Hitchin quotes on her letterhead …. The important thing is not to stop questioning." Albert Einstein

Is Pierce County missing the forest for the trees? The focus on addressing chronic homelessness has been on an experimental concept of a “micro city.” What other solutions are being considered to provide housing and dignity to the chronically homeless that could house MORE people FASTER?

Is this a viable solution for Pierce County? Texas has a lot of land. Pierce County does not. Texas has a lot of Christian volunteers committed to this ministry. Pierce County does not. If the Executive’s office can identify only one parcel in all of Pierce County where they could possibly build this, then the idea to replicate this is off the table. Senior Council O’Ban said that this is NOT an EVIDENCED-BASED concept. (July 19, 2022). It might work in Texas, but Pierce County operates under completely different political, religious, legal, and legislative systems.

Why is the Spanaway site still being considered when this use is not allowed? This project was planned in a location where this use is not legal and could be made so only by forcing changes to ordinances to subvert zoning regulations to fit their need.

The original proposal site matrix was biased. You had concerns. When you asked for more options due to doubts with the Spanaway site, the Executive’s office presented you with sites that they knew wouldn’t work. This should NOT invalidate your concerns related to the inappropriateness of the proposed Spanaway site for this use.

Residential Resource Zones (RRZ) are not appropriate for micro cities. Your own Community Development Committee said they must not be permitted in RR Zones of Frederickson Mid-County, and South Hill….What makes it allowable in the Parkland-Spanaway-Midland area? Shared housing villages either fit in Residential Resource Zones or they do not. They do not fit in any Residential resource Zone.  

Nothing about this use conditionally fits this area. It is zoned for 1 to 3 homes per acre. If it is necessary to use funny math to manipulate the number of housing units per acre to squeeze the square peg into a round hole, it is wrong and overreaching. This manipulation would NOT be allowed for a citizen contractor, and it should NOT be allowed by the County.

The Executive’s office’ opinion on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of other sites does not change the fact that this site IS NOT APROPRIATE FOR THIS USE.

Leaders lead-- Just say no!

Is a DESIGNER city for 250 chronically homeless over six years a good investment considering the Pierce County has currently 4,300 homeless people? Could the $22 million seed money be allocated more appropriately to projects that house many more homeless faster instead of only 6% in 6 years?

How confident are you that TRM will be able to raise approximately $52 million to advance from phase 1A? I read the Executive’s response to your funding concerns, and it was a lot of hopefulness without committed funds, still relying on the Field of Dreams philosophy of “build it and they will come.”

Has the time to do this passed for such a grand scale experiment?

This project was planned in good economic times. Since then, Pierce County citizens are struggling to live with escalating inflation. Homelessness grows daily. Our Nation’s debt is skyrocketing. 65% of TRM’s operating budget comes from private funding and 35% comes from government funding (Source: TNT). It is highly probable that generous donations will be severely reduced. 

Since this project was planned:

• The stock market continues to deep dive.
• Our Country is at risk for a Systemic Failure of Community Banks –It could be a contagion that hursts many industries like to 2008 crisis.
• The President is planning for a tremendous amount of new taxes to pay for weapons and humanitarian assistance in the Ukraine war, our Nation’s weaponry stockpile replenishment and bank bailouts.
• WA State wants more and more taxes on business and individual capital gains.
• Pierce County wants more tax money to pay for housing the homeless.
• Temporary SNAP benefits and medical Covid assistance programs are ending.
• Construction costs have skyrocketed since the initial proposal of almost $74 million. Material shortages are critical. Building delays are prevalent. Civil engineering contractors have trouble getting equipment to sites because parts aren’t available to fix what has broken.
• The charitable base higher earners – especially tech – are experiencing unprecedented layoffs. 
• Some of our country’s most intelligent financial minds are advising undertaking austerity measures in 2023 and 2024. They expect this downturn in the economy to potentially double-dip into a deeper recessionary phase. 

I applaud you for seeking solutions to end homelessness. I ask again, are you missing the forest for the trees? Launching into a six-year, $73 million project that will provide only 250 living units for the chronically homeless seems like a designer solution for a few – amidst an ever-growing problem that leaves 4,300 people looking for shelter every night.  There must be other possibly more generic options to house the chronically homeless while still providing them with dignity.

What would your answer be if your financial advisor came to you and said he wanted your seed money for a great investment. Give him $22 million to get it started. Then, he will ask other investors to give him $50+ million to continue this over the next six years with no guarantees that this project will reach completion. It is not an evidence-based concept. It’s planned for a location that is not legal and could contaminate the region’s critical watershed; but we’re working with lawyers to change laws so that we can push it through and avoid things like Environmental Impact Statements. On-going, 75% of the operating costs will pay for staff salaries and the actual place will be run by volunteers. People living there can earn money –a total pot of $375,000 per year has been set aside for 250 workers. Among the leftovers in the operating budget is $25,000 a year for transportation for the people who will be isolated one mile from the nearest road, and a pittance amount to provide security for those who live within and around the micro city. Would you write your personal check for this?