Thanks, Pat, for beginning a discussion of the many & deep differences between Lacy & Olympia on how the neighboring cities deal w/ the homeless situation. However, *one* chat with *one* staffer and *one* Councillor in Lacey does not take the conversation very far. How about pinning down Mr. Greenstein on exactly HOW it is Lacey refuses to provide any shelters for *their* homeless population? If Lacey refuses to spend one dime on shelters does this not shove the regional homeless population directly to Olympia, seemingly the *only* local jurisdiction that *does* spend considerable funds on shelters and other mitigation services? Mr. Greenstein smugly contends, “Olympia brought these problems on themselves so it’s their problem to solve.” How can he say this with a straight face when Lacey refuses to provide ANY housing for homeless. They are clearly devolving the regional problem onto Olympia by not providing any housing for the regional homeless population, nor spending any of their share of ARPA funds. Lastly, how does not having a discernible downtown in Lacey (only one of its charming characteristics), allow them to avoid having services within city limits, such as a Food Bank, Salvation Army or Downtown Mitigation Site, as Olympia has allowed?
The differences between how Lacey and Olympia on respective homeless policies are stark and obvious. Pat, I ask you to pursue this conversation with Lacey much further, and try to be more hardball than 'nice' next time. And, while we're at it, how about pursuing the same conversation with Tumwater, Yelm, Tenino, etc.?
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
