This is the first in a three-part series, “The Cost of Homelessness.” Failed “Housing First” homeless policies have resulted in more people suffering on our streets. In turn, this puts more stress on local taxpayers to fund the public services the growing homeless population requires. We will examine these startling costs and explore if focusing on treatment (instead of housing) is more effective and efficient.

Another new report shows that Washington State has become a destination location for our country’s homeless individuals. Further, once the homeless individual arrives in our state, our taxpayer-funded services fail to help them with their addiction and mental health problems, and they become chronically homeless and a lifelong drain of public services.

Respected homelessness researcher Dr. Robert Marmut conducted extensive interviews with more than 400 homeless individuals in Spokane. The results found that:

• 50.2% experienced homelessness first outside of Spokane.
• 63% do not currently or have never had family living in Spokane.
• 80% were born outside of Spokane.

And once the out-of-stater arrives in Washington, the public services available fail to address the real issues causing their homelessness – addiction and mental health. (Remember, a large survey of homeless individuals by the University of California found that 75% self-reported that they had addiction issues and 78% had mental health issues (the true figures are likely higher). Instead, public resources are spent on expensive long-term public housing projects (and the large bureaucracy to administer it) where the individual continues to suffer from their addiction and mental health issues due to the lack of treatment options.

The report’s findings are very similar to a recent Discovery Institute’s survey Dr. Marmut and Caitlyn McKenney conducted with Seattle’s homeless population. They found:

• 49.7% experienced homelessness first outside of Seattle/King County.
• 66.8% do not currently or have never had family living in Seattle/King County.
• 86.6 were born outside of Seattle/King County.

Dr. Marmut explains why these figures and results are very disturbing: “[There are] two real negative effects: It’s now moved the person to [having] less of a chance of recovery, and you’re diluting your resources by half for the people who are homegrown.”

Many homeless individuals move to Washington with the belief they will find financial prosperity in the home state of Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing. Yet when they arrive, they learn they don’t have the necessary skills to obtain a position, or they are unable to perform the job due to addiction issues.

Others come to our state because of the numerous taxpayers-funded programs, such as the King County’s Health Through Housing initiative where homeless individuals are given free housing in units that each cost the taxpayers more than $330,000 to purchase.

King County’s 211 Crises Connection’s website lists “5,000 services” to support those struggling with housing issues. From rent assistance, utilities discounts, and medical care to free meals, gas money, and diapers, we are told that “1,500 agencies” are providing help to homeless individuals who move to Washington. 

It is worth noting that despite ¾ of homeless population admitting they have addiction problems, the website makes it very difficult for a struggling addict to find treatment help. The only mention of addiction assistance is not on the website’s main “Community Resources” page. Oddly, the addict must click on website’s “Contacts” link to find the solitary mention of the “WA Recovery Hotline.”  

Dr. Marmut has previously stated that housing is not the primary issue with the homeless (as big government advocates like former King Co Executive Dow Constantine want the public to believe), but it is the inability to maintain financial stability (mostly due to addiction and mental illness), that causes most people to be homeless.

A recent U.S. Housing and Urban Development report determined that Washington State has the worst chronic homelessness in the country. This is the result of addicted and mentally ill homeless people moving to our state and only receiving public assistance that enables their self-destructive behavior to continue and fails to address their true issues which impact their stability.

Dr. Marmut advocates the following strategy:

• Prioritize funding of EFFECTIVE treatment programs.
• Create paths for those with long-term ties to the region to reunite them with their family.
• Support long-term recovery by supporting programs that train homeless individuals to receive meaningful employment.
• Help those who accept treatment and enforce public safety laws on those who refuse.

Our political leadership should be concerned with the negative impact of current state and local policies. While the state’s latest anti-business policies are forcing more tax paying companies and family wage jobs to leave the state, our homeless strategy is attracting those who will be a lifelong drain of our public resources. This will only result in more people who will be chronically homeless due to the lack of effective treatment options and a higher tax burden for remaining state residents.