Taxpayer-Funded “Drug Shacks” Inside Seattle Tiny Home Villages
New revelations regarding Seattle’s tiny home villages have raised concerns on how effective this program is in helping homeless individuals battle their addictions in order to return to a productive life. These questions arise as new Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson has made tiny homes the centerpiece of her homelessness strategy.
Last week We Heart Seattle’s Andrea Suarez toured the Interbay Tiny House Village that is on 15th Avenue W. between Queen Anne and Magnolia. During her guided tour, Suarez asked about one empty unit that had a few folding chairs in the middle.
Her guide explained, “This is the drug house for people to do drugs. You can come in here, do your drugs, fetty (fentanyl) or something.”
The guide explained that the drug shack was usually full of people in the middle of the day, but since it was the end of the month, the residents had already spent most of their government assistance checks. But at the start of the next month, the resident drug dealers will be prepared with a new supply of illegal drugs for the residents to purchase.
Saurez expressed her frustration that, “Taxpayers are funding dealers to be housed for free. For as long as they want, until they are caught.”
Saurez concluded her tour recap by stating, “Ask elected officials, ‘Do you know tiny home villages have a dedicated tiny house to be used as a fentanyl smoking shack?’” She asserted that those in charge of our homelessness strategy need to be honest with taxpayers and let them decide if this is how they want their tax money spent.
Journalist Jonathan Choe sought more information on these taxpayer-supported drug shacks from Sharon Lee, who is paid more than $350,000 a year (2024 salary) as the Executive Director of the Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI), which operates Seattle’s 15 tiny house villages.
Choe asked Lee about the drug shacks that her organization made available to the Interbay residents. Lee took a short pause before stating, “We have a ‘no drug or alcohol’ in any public place.”
Voters have the right to know if drug shacks are an official policy of LIHI and did city officials sign off on it? Also, will the drug shacks be part of the massive expansion that Mayor Wison is calling for?
Homelessness expert Michelle Steeb recently called for earlier intervention and more treatment options for those who are homeless. The goal is to help homeless people remove drugs and alcohol from their lives to provide them with more opportunities to succeed. Steeb states the current process only seeks to have the addict survive, not recover.
Steeb described how the federal government is now seeking to change how we respond to homelessness. Last summer the President signed an Executive Order calling for homelessness funds to be redirected to programs that focus on addiction and mental health treatment. As a person is removed from drugs and alcohol, they are better able to take advantage of opportunities that will improve their lives.
Unfortunately, those who developed and work within the current system (which calls for the expansion of government housing and very few resources for treatment) are fighting back against this change. Despite homelessness continuing to climb and more and more deaths occurring, they have filed a lawsuit against the feds to preventadditional treatment options.
But who could blame them? This lawsuit is driven by people and organizations that are well compensated under the current system. If treatment reduces the number of homeless, then there will be less demand for the services they provide
Having taxpayer-funded drug shacks in the center of little home villages is a disturbing revelation for most citizens. We need to have more public discussion on whether we agree that this is the best way to spend limited resources. Whether these rooms are removed or kept, we can do more to help people become independent through recovery.
Seattle has one of the strongest 12-step recovery communities in the country. There are tens of thousands of Seattle residents working a program to recover from their various addiction (alcohol, drugs, gambling, nicotine, etc.). These groups nearly always have programs which bring meetings into prisons and hospitals.
If we are forcing taxpayers to fund the current drug shacks, why not offer the option of having a unit set aside for recovery? In the drug shack addicts can continue harm themselves by smoking fentanyl or shooting up heroin. The other room (right next door?) there can be daily 12-step meetings and recovery counselors available to help. As more people recover and a clean & sober community grows, there will be more role models for addicts to follow. Many will likely stop going to the drug house and instead seek to end their painful addictions by going to the recovery house.
Michelle Steeb asks a very important question on homelessness which we should all think about. “Will we continue supporting policymakers and policies that simply manage decline — in our streets, in our neighborhoods, and inside people’s own homes — or will we fight to help Americans heal and prosper?”
Photo: We Heart Seattle on X