KCRHA’s reset gives Katie Wilson a chance to change course on homelessness

It has not been an easy few weeks for Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson.

The aftermath of the deadly Bite of Seattle shooting raised serious questions about communication and leadership at City Hall. Wilson replaced Seattle Police Chief Shon Barnes in the middle of that controversy. And a recall effort has now been launched against her, with public safety among the central complaints.

But amid all of that, Wilson has also been handed an enormous opportunity.

Seattle and King County are fundamentally restructuring the King County Regional Homelessness Authority (KCRHA), taking back most of the responsibilities the troubled agency was created to handle.

At the same time, the federal government is pushing for a major change in homelessness policy, placing greater emphasis on addiction treatment, mental health care, recovery and self-sufficiency.

Handled correctly, this could be a turning point for Seattle’s approach to homelessness.

In July, Wilson and King County Executive Girmay Zahilay announced that Seattle and King County would reclaim management of locally funded homelessness contracts from KCRHA after years of leadership turnover and serious questions about the agency’s financial controls and oversight.

What remains of KCRHA will be much narrower.

The agency will continue managing regional homelessness data, coordinating the annual homeless count and housing referral system, and serving as the lead agency responsible for applying for federal Continuum of Care funding.

In August, Wilson and Zahilay said moving homelessness contracts back to Seattle and King County would allow KCRHA to concentrate on its “core regional role, including administering the federal Continuum of Care.”

Rather than dissolve KCRHA, local leaders have chosen to preserve a much smaller agency focused on a handful of regional functions — perhaps most importantly, serving as the region’s lead agency for federal homelessness funding.

That means the future of KCRHA is now unusually intertwined with the changing federal debate over how homelessness should be addressed.

The Seattle-King County Continuum of Care receives roughly $66 million a year in federal funding, supporting housing and homelessness programs serving more than 4,500 residents.

For years, much of the region’s strategy has revolved around Housing First, which prioritizes getting people into permanent housing without requiring sobriety or participation in treatment as a condition of housing.

The Trump administration is attempting to move federal homelessness policy in a different direction.

Earlier this year, HUD proposed major changes to the federal funding competition, limiting how much could be directed toward permanent housing and putting greater emphasis on treatment, recovery and self-sufficiency. KCRHA’s own planning documents warned that anticipated restrictions could require dramatic changes because more than 90 percent of its existing federal portfolio fell into permanent housing programs.

HUD’s changes are facing legal challenges that continue to play out in the courts, and its 2026 funding competition has been paused.

But the administration has demonstrated a clear commitment to the broader strategy shift.

Just days after the latest court ruling, HUD, the Department of Health and Human Services and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy launched a national “Treatment First” initiative aimed at connecting people experiencing homelessness and addiction with treatment and recovery services.

HUD Secretary Scott Turner put the premise plainly: “Housing is essential, but housing alone is not enough.”

That should not be a controversial idea in Seattle.

Housing and shelter are obviously important. But housing by itself cannot treat severe fentanyl addiction, schizophrenia or other serious behavioral health conditions.

That is where Wilson has a choice to make.

When announcing the KCRHA restructuring, Wilson vowed to pursue the region’s federal dollars, while arguing that Seattle could face resistance from the Trump administration because of political differences.

There will undoubtedly be disagreements between Seattle City Hall and the federal government.

But addiction treatment and mental health care should not become casualties of that political fight.

Seattle does not have to embrace every Trump administration policy to acknowledge something important in this new direction: helping someone survive homelessness is not enough. The goal should be helping people reach stability, recovery and ultimately a better life.

Taxpayers should expect meaningful results too.

The latest Point-in-Time Count estimates 18,365 people were experiencing homelessness in King County, up 9 percent from 2024. Unsheltered homelessness reached nearly 12,000 people. Other major cities have seen their homeless populations decline – San Francisco’s by 22% – by adopting policies like making housing contingent on treatment and enforcing laws on the books against public campaign and open-air drug use.

Whatever one believes is responsible for that increase, those numbers make it difficult to argue that the status quo is good enough.

Wilson and Zahilay deserve credit for recognizing that KCRHA could not continue operating as it had before. Moving contracts back to governments directly accountable to voters and narrowing the authority’s responsibilities are meaningful changes.

Now they need to reconsider more than the organizational chart.

A successful reset should mean judging homelessness programs by whether fewer people are living on the streets, whether more people struggling with addiction reach recovery, whether people with severe mental illness receive meaningful care and whether taxpayer-funded programs are actually helping people toward lasting stability.

For Wilson in particular, this could be a transformational moment.

After a difficult stretch for her administration, she has an opportunity to demonstrate real leadership: acknowledge what has not worked, move beyond old political divisions and build a homelessness strategy that treats housing, addiction and mental illness as interconnected problems.

If Wilson makes a genuine commitment to treatment, recovery and measurable results, the collapse of KCRHA’s old model could become the beginning of something much better.

But if this restructuring merely moves contracts between government offices while preserving the same approach to homelessness, Seattle should expect little to change.

Wilson has been handed an opportunity.

She should take it.