Disposable bags have hidden costs

In response to Bruce Ramsey's assertions ["Civil disagreement: Should Seattle tax disposable grocery bags?" seattletimes.com, Ed Cetera blog, July 23]: No, disposable bags aren't free.

Plastic bags create a litter problem that the city has to spend tax dollars to fix. They also jam Seattle Public Utilities' recycling equipment, which costs you as a ratepayer.

Moreover, we can only hazard an educated guess at the long-term environmental cost of the greenhouse-gas emissions created by producing paper and plastic bags.

Seattleites should support the voluntary fee on paper and plastic bags because it will benefit the environment and help reduce waste. I would think responsible Seattleites might also support Referendum 1 because it will save them money over the long term.

-- Blair Anundson, Seattle

"Hurting the poor" line is no argument at all

I was incensed to see the full-page ad (shows you how much money they already have) paid for by the chemical industry urging Seattle citizens to vote against the plastic bag tax. It was a great relief a few pages later to see the thoughtful and coherent guest column by Kathy Fletcher and Denis Hayes urging us to pass the bag tax ["Vote to eliminate disposable grocery bags," Opinion, July 28].

It's astonishing there is even a question about this: It's so obvious that using cloth bags benefits everyone except Exxon, Chevron, DuPont and the ilk. The opposition's pathetic and transparent attempt to cite the poor as sufferers if this sensible idea becomes law is a curious attempt to find something -- anything -- to grab a vote. The poor worldwide, and ever since shopping began, have used cloth or string bags -- as has everyone with any sense.

-- Nancy Pennington, Seattle

Let's take care of the needy before the environment

I am very proud of how green our city has become. At our house, we hardly use our garbage disposal, recycle our food waste, yard clippings, bottles, papers and plastic bags. We also garden organically. Our car always carries reusable grocery bags, and we both have packs and bags for unexpected purchases.

However, when I first heard about the drive for a bag fee my very words to my husband were, "This will kill the poor and homeless." In our drive to be environmentally sensitive, we need to also step out of our own worlds and think about being sensitive to the unpredictable lives of the least among us.

Not everyone leads my privileged existence. We should take care of the planet but not forget to take care of the suffering people on it.

-- Toni Cross, Seattle

Politicians, please stay out of my kitchen

I just completed one of life's simple pleasures -- reading The Seattle Times. It arrived, as it does every day, in a plastic bag!

If we eliminate the plastic bags, can we still expect a clean, dry Seattle Times on our doorstep every morning?

We still use our supermarket bags to line garbage containers (in your face, Kathy Fletcher) and dutifully recycle any of the remaining bags. If we eliminate the plastic bags we will be required to buy replacements.

Reducing the number of plastic bags is a noble goal, but we should reach that goal through education, not legislation. Mayor [Greg] Nickels, please stay out of our kitchen.

-- Merle Hanley, Seattle

With education, increase recycling and responsible use

Oh my, even our progressive environmentalists can fall behind the times and technology. Kathy Fletcher and Denis Hayes are right about the need to protect our natural world, but they seem to be stuck in that stereotypical "man and greedy business are to blame for destroying Mother Earth -- if only the two would go away" train of thought.

The Environmental Protection Agency tells us plastic bags are more environmentally friendly than paper bags when considering the methods and shipping required for their respective production and, in fact, plastic causes less air and water pollution and is a better method of preventing food-borne illness.

For the record, I am not a greedy industrialist. Perpetuating eternal crises is the mantra of extremist groups, but is anyone really against Puget Sound? For them, theirs is the only enlightened path, and there is no compromise. Man and profit are always evil.

Well, the reality is, humans and their need to exist and thrive will not go away. In order to keep balance, man has always developed technology to solve its problems. Fletcher and Hayes demand complete and irrevocable removal of plastic bags from Seattle but do not mention the successes other large cities have experienced in reducing and recycling plastic. Phoenix, Twin Cities and states like Illinois and California, for example, have programs that have dramatically reduced plastic use and enhanced recycling efforts. In six months alone, Phoenix has increased recycling by 20 percent.

The truth so often is in the middle. Plastics serve a vital role in our society, but approaching the issue through recycling, anti-littering campaigns and judicious use is the answer -- not taxing plastic bags.

Supporting responsible programs trumps hysteria. Fletcher and Hayes should get on board.

-- Mark L. Bowers, Issaquah

Reusable bags are so much simpler

Kathy Fletcher and Denis Hayes' guest column was informative and useful, as it showed the inherent waste of these bags as a compelling reason not to use them.

I switched primarily for convenience, as it was becoming a colossal pain dealing with those bulging bags. Some random observations about plastic bags.

My reusable carryalls stay in my car after being emptied. They wipe clean if necessary. They are stackable and light, yet quite sturdy.

Mine were $1, purchased at a dollar store.

This has been my system for a few years. For a while, I expected the checkers and cashiers would resent having their "bag by the belly" routine disrupted, but the opposite has been the case. They still try to scan them and charge me if I'm not on top of it, but generally they welcome reusable bag use.

I think people are resistant to this change because they don't see what's in it for them. If some of the grocery or retail behemoths offered something like the blue plastic bags, they could easily see a decent profit by doubling dollar-store prices, if not tripling them.

This opinion is offered by a person who is lazy and not a shining example for the recycling effort. I use these bags because it is so much simpler.

-- Regina Ambrose, Auburn

Instead of taxing plastic bags, reward reusable bag use

I disagree with Kathy Fletcher and Denis Hayes' guest column. While their desire to see fewer plastic bags befoul the environment has merit, their way of going about it lacks as much.

Instead of charging each shopper 20 cents per time they get a plastic bag, why not incentivize them by giving a discount when they opt to reuse one?
The grocery store where I shop already gives shoppers a 3-cents-per-bag discount when they use a reusable bag. It's not much, but it's something. It helps me remember to use the totes.

I suspect our local politicians like the idea of the bag tax because it's another way for them to get revenue out of an already beleaguered consumer. The last thing we need is to give our city bureaucracy more money to mismanage.

-- Marc Melino, Seattle

Plastic bag irony on my doorstep

I am in total agreement with Kathy Fletcher and Denis Hayes' guest column regarding the bag tax. However, I find it ironic that this morning's Seattle Times came inside a plastic bag!

-- Steve Cramer, Federal Way

City Council's cottage proposal could make Seattle affordable

The Seattle City Council's willingness to consider allowing backyard cottages throughout the city deserves a hearty "Bravo!" Perhaps with a bit of encouragement, the council could enact the policy without limits on how many are built per year and without owner residency requirements.

Even with a downward trend in home prices, Seattle is still unaffordable. The backyard-cottage proposal will encourage construction of small units, allowing some who otherwise couldn't live in Seattle the opportunity to do so. It will also add to the stock of housing available to low-income and homeless people. The difference between an 800-square-foot cottage and living on the street or in a shelter is both substantial and reason enough to allow the cottages.

Of course, some will complain that cottages will mean "those people" will move into their neighborhoods or that their serenity will be disturbed. Why is it that a property owner's rights must be trumped by those who don't own the property? And why is it OK to effectively zone "those people" out of some neighborhoods?

Or is this just hysteria? Experience with the cottages in southeast Seattle suggests that it is.

Too many reasons for it, too few against -- let's give it a shot.

-- Scott St. Clair, Olympia

Cottages will make neighborhoods more dense

That Bryan Stevens of the Seattle Department of Planning and Development can actually state that the addition of backyard cottages will not increase single-family neighborhood density indicates he needs a new job in the private sector.

-- Don DeWeese, Seattle

Oh the irony: homeless neglected while convicts cared for

As a homeless person, I am frustrated after reading Nancy Bartley's article ["Homeless camp now on state property," NWWednesday, June 10] on the homeless encampment on state land just outside Seattle city limits.

I am not "homeless" by the federal definition, since I have my pickup to sleep in, but I am homeless, nevertheless.

I do very much resent all the money society spends caring for criminals in jails and prisons, while ignoring the basic needs of those whose only offense is the inability to afford a home. It makes me almost want to get arrested

Of course, I would be trading my freedom for three squares and a pad, medical and dental care, perhaps even an organ transplant, along with TV and other amenities. Freedom loses some of its appeal when you're tired, wet, cold, hungry, maybe have a toothache and are broke to boot.

The homeless group in the article has organized to try to obtain a little security and dignity, and they don't even have porta-potties, while convicted criminals have all their basic needs met.

It makes you wonder about societies' priorities, doesn't it?

-- Gene "Sarge" Sargent, Milton

Seattle can do better

I would love to see state and local officials decide to support the Nickelsville homeless camp in its latest location rather than once more try to force it to disband ["Campers return to South Park site," page one, June 8].

This would be a decided change of policy for Mayor Greg Nickels, but a person can hope! Nickelsville is an organized, important effort by homeless people themselves to solve a growing problem that the city has abdicated any responsibility for.

I was one of the 25 Nickelsville residents and supporters arrested for trespassing last September. The city dropped the charges against us on May 29.

It's way past time to replace punitive and ineffective sweeps and arrests with a posture of active support for the homeless. Seattle government needs to replace the units of low-income housing lost in recent years to the profit-making schemes of developers, increase the amount of ongoing shelter space available, and help the Nickelodeons settle into a permanent home.

-- Andrea Bauer, Seattle

Former safe house now a hardhearted place

What a sad day for Seattle when new library rules allow ousting someone for "the appearance of sleeping" ["Library manners," Opinion, editorial, June 1].

My first job was with the Seattle Library 50 years ago at a time when eccentrics and street people mixed compatibly with other readers. Over the years I've been delighted to observe that the Seattle Library was a kind of safe house for the dispossessed, be they Vietnam vets or the homeless.

Together we were a living, diverse community of readers. Since the new library was built, so uncongenial to readers and attractive to those who look up dating services and war games on the computers, the library has become a cold-eyed and hardhearted place.

I might very likely have "the appearance of sleeping" while meditating on an idea in the library, but I would likely not be ousted because I don't look like a street person. The homeless woman next to me, perhaps a dreamer and a genius, would be shown the door. Sad, sad, sad!

-- Judith Larsen, Bainbridge Island

A letter to Mayor Greg Nickels

Just after dark this past Saturday, two neighbors of mine, in separate incidents, were beaten within an inch of their lives just for walking down the sidewalk near the Othello Light Rail Station. Beyond the bloody details, all I know is this: This would not have happened in your West Seattle neighborhood.

With the light rail opening in less than 90 days, I want you, my mayor, to tell us what you are going to do to ensure this does not happen again.

Here are my suggestions for you, since you appear uninformed and incapable of real action on your stated city goal of Neighborhood Policing and Public Safety. These are from the well-respected South Seattle Crime Prevention Council, whose funding you unwisely decided to cut:

1. Hire new officers immediately.

2. Assign any new officers to the gang unit.

3. Give Rainier Beach, Othello Station, New Holly, Columbia City and Mt. Baker Seattle Police Department foot patrols comparable to those walking the beat in West Seattle Junction or the Pike/Pine Corridor. These foot patrols have been widely praised for reducing crime ["Black-and-blue assault on crime: Downtown shopping grows safer," News, Sept. 23, 2008].

4. Get someone in the SPD media-relations unit to learn how to return a phone call.

My neighbors of all ages are already getting beaten, robbed, shot at and killed, whether they're walking down the sidewalk, riding the bus or just sitting in their living rooms. What more do you require?

Step up, man, we need you.

-- Tristin Pagenkopf, Hillman City, Seattle

Kudos to Metro drivers and information line

I would like to rave in thanks for Seattle Metro bus drivers and the rider information line of our wonderful bus system.

I am an everyday user of our bus system and on Tuesday I unfortunately lost my wallet on the 41 in north Seattle. When transferring to the 75, I reached for my wallet, but it was not with me. The bus driver said, "Climb aboard and ride with me for a while and I will call it in." He called dispatch and was told it had not been found.

I went back to my transfer point to retrace my path and I didn't find it, either. I accepted the fact that it was gone, but I decided to call the information line anyway to report it. They took the information and told me a supervisor would call me back later, so I went home.

An hour later, the supervisor returned my call and said that it had been found and the bus could meet me in Lake City in a few hours. I met the bus and my wallet was safe and sound.

My rave is for the very hardworking folks who drive for Metro and I encourage all riders to be kind to our public servants. It's not their fault the bus is overcrowded or taking too long because the streets are jammed with cars holding one person each. Patience is a virtue we all need to practice more. I found that they go the extra mile to care for us customers. Thanks, Metro.

-- James J. Hupf, Seattle

Helping to break a never-ending cycle

Providing stable housing and a place for homeless to regain their balance is a wonderful idea ["Project saves taxpayer money," NW Wednesday, April 1]. As a person who used to live in the San Francisco Bay Area, homelessness is an issue that is near and dear to my heart.

Once people get stuck in the cycle of homelessness, it is very difficult to break free from it. The cycle is vicious and never-ending, especially with the recession as it is. Why would employers hire someone off the street when they can easily hire college graduates or high-school students, for that matter?

Many of these homeless have been on the street for many years and have learned to adapt to the hazards of living on the street. In this sense, they are hardworking and experienced in ways that the average student or person is not, which makes them resourceful employees.

By placing the homeless in homes, they have the opportunity to clean up, allowing them to create a better first impression and re-enter the workforce.

I hope that more cities will adopt this type of recovery program because it sounds like a wonderful idea.

-- Kellie Ouye, El Cerrito, Calif.

Housing a prime ingredient for recovery

Thanks to Jerry Large for his fine column on the ongoing success of the Downtown Emergency Service Center's (DESC) 1811 Eastlake project, which provides housing to hard-core alcoholics ["No place like home for alcoholics," NW Thursday, April 2].

The program has proved successful in many ways. I have been a social worker in Seattle's downtown for more than 30 years. As a co-founder of the Pike Market Medical Clinic and DESC, I have repeatedly observed the critical role that affordable and accessible housing plays in the lives of all indigent individuals.

For many who struggle with alcoholism, other addictions, mental illness or a combination of these afflictions, housing is a prime ingredient in any plan for recovery and ongoing treatment. While numerous residents at the Eastlake project continue to drink, it is not surprising that ER visits and incarcerations are significantly reduced. And even the overall amount of alcohol consumed by residents seems to be less.

These factors surely bolster the argument many low-income housing advocates and human-service providers have made for decades: Housing is indispensable to everyone's health and well-being.

For those grappling with addictions, a home base makes any self-motivated effort to reform and embrace recovery a much more likely prospect. Life on perilous streets only enhances the misery and confusion that overwhelm so many whose lives are already devastated by alcohol, drugs or profound psychological problems.

The Eastlake project deserves applause and should serve as a model for future endeavors to assist those caught in the deleterious throes of addiction.

-- Joe Martin, Seattle

Lost your home? Start drinking

Seattle is saving money by putting homeless alcoholics into apartments. Maybe we should take this good news a step further.

A lot of people are losing their homes right now. What they should do when they lose a home is move onto the street and start drinking. This will give liquor stores more business and increase tax revenues, and the state will then be able to build more apartments to put more drunks in.

This is a perfect circle when you think about it. The cash-strapped government already plans to open more liquor stores and extend their hours. This will allow the homeless to drink on a more convenient schedule and feel good about contributing to the tax base. It can be a wrenching experience to lose your home, but drinking in the street until you qualify for a new residence can be a positive way to deal with adversity.

Critics of this plan will claim that it promotes alcoholism. But the city has already proven that people will cut down on their drinking once they've obtained an apartment. Besides, it seems like a small price to pay for solving the foreclosure crisis.

-- David Billings, Alger

Come back to Earth, rocket man

The Associated Press

Hungarian-born U.S. software designer and space tourist Charles Simonyi, crew member of the 19th mission to the International Space Station, ISS, is seen prior to the launch of Soyuz-FG rocket at the Russian-leased Baikonur Cosmodrome, Kazakhstan, Thursday.

Editor, The Times:

There is something that bothers me about the Microsoft billionaire who just paid $35 million to the Russian space program to take a second ride into space ["U.S. space tourist blasts off for second space trip," Nation and World, March 26].

Where should a human being draw the line on his own self-satisfaction? Would one space trip be enough for most folks who could afford it? What obligation does one owe to humankind when one has been blessed beyond our comprehension?

Is "I earned it so I can spend it as I please" the final determinant?

There was a prophet who said, "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren that you do also unto me." Whatever one thinks about the divinity of the prophet, there is a thread that draws us all together.

Charles Simonyi may indeed also donate many millions to those less fortunate than himself -- I hope so. However, whimsical satisfaction of my lightest desire is not something I strive for. When there are people living in tents through no particular failure on their part, I think $35 million could pay for more than a few apartments.

Perhaps after seeing the Big Blue Marble for the second time, Simonyi will be struck by the need to protect it from further damage and help those in need who live on it.

-- Jack McClurg, Marysville

It's not OK to keep the money

Recently, someone gave a young person on the sidewalk a few dollars. This young person was actually a college student, living on the streets as an experiment ["Spending spring break on life's bottom rung," page one, March 26]. They wanted to feel the pain of homelessness firsthand.

This student gave most of the money to charity, but the students did spend a few dollars for food while they were on the streets.

In other words, a few homeless people did not get those few dollars, so they did not eat.
To all students who may try this experience in the future; it is not OK to keep a cent of this money.

-- Matthew Daniel Berkley, Seattle

Throwing money not the answer

["Group hopes to cut number of homeless families in state," Local News, March 19] argues against these blanket leftist schemes that throw money at perceived problems, thus extending the problems.

Carefully read about Jackilin Abiem. She has gotten pregnant twice and, so, can't find or afford an apartment. Now think if she hadn't gotten pregnant. Would her life and opportunities be better? What about her personal responsibility?

Certainly there are many people "down on their luck" from circumstances beyond their control. They should be assisted. But Ms. Abiem? I have trouble either feeling sorry for her or being supportive of spending tax money on encouraging unwed births.

Another article in Thursday's paper ("More kids born in '07; fewer moms married," News) states that 40 percent of births are to unwed mothers. I don't think that is necessarily good for society as a whole, to which Ms. Abiem's problems attest.

-- Theodore M. Wight, Seattle

An unsettling trend

Surely in this period of spiraling economic distress it is worthwhile to plumb the recollections of those who endured the rigors of the Great Depression. A time of unprecedented hardship and destitution for many, the pain of scarcity and insecurity left an indelible mark on all who suffered through the traumatic ordeal.

However, it should be noted that for decades an increasing number of Americans have been living in conditions that could perhaps rival the hardships of long ago.

Over the past 30 years, millions of our fellow citizens have experienced profound impoverishment and homelessness for long stretches of time. The current crisis is certain to increase the ranks of those so marginalized. A rapidly changing economy and work environment, a shrinking supply of housing affordable to poor and working-class people and myriad other factors contribute to this unsettling trend.

Although the systemic meltdown now occurring is throwing many individuals and families into a state of shock, there was already a whole segment of American society mired in poverty and completely untouched by the wild prosperity of the so-called boom years.

The adage of a rising tide lifting all boats no longer applies. And a receding tide is already sinking whole sectors of our polity; the damage is probably not yet complete.

This is all the more troubling, given our city government's unwillingness to cooperate with SHARE/WHEEL, which operates the most cost-effective system of shelters in our area. The city has denied SHARE/WHEEL the money desperately needed to maintain their critical services in this period of mounting economic turmoil.

Seattle must provide this admirable organization with the financial support it requires to do its important work and do it now. A civilized society has a duty to mitigate the worst ravages of deprivation and homelessness. SHARE/WHEEL is in the front lines of doing just that, and they do it every day of the year.

-- Joe Martin, Seattle

Doesn't help the problem

In reference to the Vulcan-produced film "Where God Left His Shoes," Nicole Brodeur writes that "I get the sense sometimes that we are weary of the homeless; their faces blend together in a stereotype of lazy, or addicted, or mentally ill." ["Face of homeless is changing," staff columnist, Dec. 9.] She contrasted the film's portrayal of a homeless nuclear family with that stereotype.

In the case of many people who have no personal connection with anyone who is homeless, she's probably right. They may feel an uneasy combination of feelings, including compassion, fear and uncertainty about what to do. Those feelings can lead to weariness. However, that weariness is nothing compared with that experienced by those who are homeless. Her next comment makes very clear that she still doesn't get it: "It seems to me the face of the homeless is changing, becoming more familiar and closer to our own."

Our own? That reminds me of the early days of AIDS, when people talked about the "innocent victims" of the disease, meaning people who weren't homosexual. Now, apparently homeless families are innocent, whereas homeless people who have additional problems are what, guilty? Guilty of being not like us, not "familiar"?

Homelessness won't end until that kind of attitude ends.

-- Sally Kinney, Seattle

Thomas James Hurst / The Seattle Times

Property owned by West Marine, a longtime marine-supply business located on Mercer Street, is being condemned by the city, part of a long-range plan to widen and beautify the Street.

We must do better

Editor, The Times:

I am of the opinion that fixing the "Mercer mess" is a very questionable use of resources ["Council bets hopes on federal stimulus plan for Mercer," Times, News, Nov. 18].

Surely, we can see the handwriting on the wall. Lines at food banks are increasingly lengthy.
Homeless, including families with children, are scattered around our city, living in filth and danger.

Community health clinics are strapped for resources and losing ground every year. In every age range, folks are suffering.

How can we decide to leave potholes and bridges in disrepair and consider, even for a moment, fixing the "Mercer mess"? How can we ignore the needs of our people?

Our mayor pushes to make Seattle a "world-class" city.

I prefer a city that honors its citizens by providing housing, transportation, health care and other human services. That would make Seattle a world-class city -- not pandering to developers (and a mayor) who may want an easier route to South Lake Union and its amenities.

Wake up. We can and must do better.

-- Nancy Bryant, Seattle

Not so average

I appreciate that you have published a positive story during the economic downturn ["Average King County family 'pretty solid,'." News, Nov. 18].

However, you have neglected to emphasize an important detail that sets the Bentler family ahead of many that are not so "solid." They purchased their home eight years ago for about half of what it's worth today. Incomes have certainly not doubled in eight years.

Do you think the Bentler's could have afforded a $300,000 home eight years ago with their income? Not a chance.

Today, many two-income professional families starting their careers are priced out of owning such a "modest" home.

My wife and I make about $57,000 and we have a young child and a dog, much like the Bentlers. We live in an apartment because we cannot afford the mortgage payment required for today's home prices. Too many families live in communities where home prices are way out of alignment with incomes.

A rise in foreclosures and sluggish home sales are a symptom of this misalignment. A price correction in the housing market is badly needed. Who will they sell homes to if a whole generation of young professionals cannot buy them?

-- Glenn Kohler, Olympia

Let's be real

Since Oct. 31, 12 people have died from youth violence ["Seattle to spend more on homeless; garbage, water, parking rates to rise," News, Nov. 18].

For decades, suburbanites have had the nonchalant attitude, "this will not happen in my neighborhood." This attitude led adults to believe the deviant and criminal behavior of the youth will not negatively impact the upper echelon of society.

We have raised a generation of children with no awareness of self and who are unloving, uninvolved and uncaring. We call them misguided youth; you can only be misguided if you received improper guidance. We looked down upon the youth in disgust with their sagging clothes, crooked baseball caps and revealing clothing. I remember my days of the AJ jeans, cross colors, white T-shirts, khaki pants, the Kangol and the NWA blasting from my boom box on the back of the bus.

But today it is time to get off the fence, stop whining about how much things will cost, what programs we need to establish, what label to use and most important stop living in blind fear. What we should do -- at no cost -- when you see young men in their sagging clothing or young women in their revealing clothing, stop and look them in the eyes, say "Hello, how are you today?" -- instead of turning your head and looking down at the ground.

We should always show the youth with our words, deeds and a positive visions how great an asset to society they can become.

I grew up around pimps, drug dealers, hustlers and gang bangers. I needed a reality check and these young people need one as well.

We must show them what life looks like if they continue on their destructive path. Show them the lifeless bodies of the young people who have died from violence. They do not need to see those nonthreatening, prom-dance photos that we see in the media.

We need to show the courtroom photos of the bereaved parents passing out, screaming and yelling because of the eternal pain, deep sorrow and emptiness they suffer. Show them there is no glamour when a jury discloses their verdict and a judge's sentencing is real.

Show them the photos of children in their orange jumpsuits in chains at Echo Glen and the lonely, haunting and cold jail cells of Maple Lane with a community toilet and shower.

If all else fails, show them videos of McNeil Island or Monroe penitentiaries. Explain to them the staggering number of their high-school friends they thought were cool who are now or will become jobless, homeless, addicted or incarcerated.

The game is still the same; it is only fiercer.

-- Elder Wyatt, Seattle

Now more than ever

Today, you reported that Seattle will finance youth-violence prevention and social services for the homeless population on a two-year budget approval.

This is interesting because I recently began outreaching to the homeless population in San Francisco, and was wondering how Seattle, where I am originally from, helps the homeless. As a community member, I feel extremely optimistic that during this recession, the city still recognizes the importance of selflessness for others in greater need and is not going through budget cuts for social programs that are vital to our community.

What people don't realize is that because we are in a recession, more people will need to access food banks and other social services and that change takes time. Sure, we don't want to pay more for utilities or parking meters, but it's just like gas prices; we complained about how high they got but still drove anyway because we had to.

One thing that could really make a difference is better education about homelessness. I know many people who are quite ignorant about issues surrounding homelessness and as a result don't understand the need for funding of important programs.

-- Karen Hong, San Francisco, Calif.

Times doesn't speak for Seattle
I am a well-to-do downtown resident and I am appalled by Mayor Greg Nickels' lack of sympathy for those who are less fortunate. The Times Sept. 24 editorial, "Seattle doesn't deserve this pink tent city," does not speak for all of Seattle's residents.
Yes, we are a liberal city but, apparently, our mayor is not. The statement that the "people of Seattle do not want such a thing or deserve it" is not true. Most taxpaying residents are appalled by Nickels' treatment of the most vulnerable people.
I also take issue with the statement that Seattle "has offered shelter space to anyone sleeping in the parks or in the woods." How does one offer something one does not have? The shelters are full, and there are more than 2,000 men, women and children who were without shelter on some of the coldest days last winter.
The city has added about 20 beds since then and is destroying low-income housing in favor of huge, million-dollar condos, whose builders are getting tax breaks.
Our homeless need to be treated like human beings. The Ten-Year Plan to End Homelessness is being used as an excuse to displace people or [ignore them]. Many homeless folks have died on the streets already this year.
Nickels should be told to back off and allow people to survive as best they can until they can find places to live. Our mayor should be allowing the creation of more low-income housing instead of encouraging, with tax breaks, developers of fancy condos.
In today's economy, this problem will only increase, as people lose their homes and look for affordable places to live.
-- Loretta Pirozzi, Seattle

Cruelty toward homeless
The large photo of a man in a pink tent and two police officers, accompanying the story "Uneventful police sweep clears homeless camp" [Local News, Sept. 27], caught the attention of my 6-year-old son.
After I explained that the man in the tent was homeless and that the police were making him move because the tent was on land that didn't belong to him, my son had this to say: "I think that man doesn't have enough money. Why are the police officers being mean to him? Police officers are supposed to be friendly and help you."
Mayor Greg Nickels, could you please explain to my son why your police officers are being mean to homeless people? I certainly couldn't.
-- Cindy Gilbert, Seattle

Let pink tents stay
The shelter system is over capacity citywide ["Seattle doesn't deserve this pink tent city," Times, Local News, Sept. 24]. On Tuesday, Operation Nightwatch could not find emergency shelter for 24 men and women. This summer we served more than 200 people, the most in 40 years. Other agencies are reporting similar trends. Given the current economy, things may get worse before they get better.

So why is there such resistance to homeless people getting organized and camping out on vacant and unused public land? They have not asked for money from the city.

Our 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness says that homeless people "are at immediate personal risk and have a basic right to safety. Interim survival mechanisms -- services focused on keeping people alive ... are necessary until such time that affordable permanent housing is available to all."

Yes, they're playing politics with the name. It's unfortunate. But the pink tents would keep people alive this winter, with more comfort and dignity than is being provided by Interstate 5 and Kinnear Park.

I say, leave them alone.

-- The Rev. Rick Reynolds, Operation Nightwatch, Seattle

Practice what you preach, Mayor Nickels

Maybe "Seattle doesn't deserve this pink tent city" [editorial, Sept. 24] but didn't the city propose to end homelessness in 10 years?

Even though the city has dedicated considerable funds to address homelessness, the 10-year goal hasn't been achieved.

Mayor Greg Nickels expresses bad faith when ordering homeless sweeps. They clean out the homeless from their encampments like garbage and destroy their belongings.

The mayor has recently proposed $9 million to help our troubled youth extricate themselves from gangs and violence. He has also eliminated the tax on musicians performing at venues in the city to enhance city night life.

Instead of throwing the "bums" out of their tents, maybe the mayor should secure the empty site at 7115 West Marginal Way S.W.

He should advocate for them to stay at "Nickelsville" until he has completed the 10-year plan to end homelessness.

— Patrick Burns, Seattle