It is safe to say that no other elected official has had more impact on the homelessness issue in King County/Seattle than King County Executive Dow Constantine. In 2015 Constantine joined then Seattle Mayor Ed Murray to declare homelessness an emergency, he led the effort to form the much-maligned King County Regional Housing Authority (KCRHA), serves on KCRHA’s small Governance Committee, and he is in the process of spending nearly a half-billion in taxpayer funds to convert 16 former hotels around the county into 1600 supportive housing units.

We are grateful that the executive replied to our often-specific questions on the increasing problem of homelessness and why after nearly a decade since his emergency declaration the homeless numbers continue to grow (63% increase in nine years). 

After 15 years in office, Executive Constantine announced last month that he will not seek re-election in 2025.  

We are always interested in ChangeWA readers’ views on the items we post.  Please email us (at ChangeWA@mail.com) your thoughts on our interview with Executive Constantine. We may include readers’ comments in our follow-up article which will be posted next week.

It is difficult for taxpayers to learn how much of their money is being spent on homelessness
since the issue impacts multiple departments and agencies. Can you provide a breakdown of
homelessness spending by the county (and KCRHA since its creation), even if it’s an
approximate, for each of the last nine years since both King County and the City of Seattle
declared the issue an emergency?

Tackling homelessness has been a regional priority for King County and its partners since at least the
2000s. The Great Recession of the late 2000s hit an already tight housing market hard, and production
has still not caught up with demand. The County and the City of Seattle declared a homelessness
emergency in 2015 and partnered in 2019 to create the King County Regional Homelessness Authority.

As this question notes, the County’s homelessness response spans multiple departments, agencies, and
funding streams, and most of those services are provided to housed and unhoused individuals, so it is
difficult to isolate funding specifically for homelessness and provide a single, definitive figure for annual
spending. Efforts to combat homelessness range from direct homeless services such as shelter, to
broader initiatives including housing, public health, emergency response, and human services, which all
support those we are able to provide housing for and those who are unhoused.

It’s also important to note that funding for these services evolved significantly because of the pandemic,
with the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) becoming a major federal funding source, through which
some contracts are still being awarded and funds invested into next year.

King County has budgeted $108 million for KCRHA from 2021- 2024 to provide immediate interventions
for those who are living homeless, and that agency is best suited to provide a breakdown of its spending.

You were a strong supporter for the creation of the King County Regional Homelessness
Authority (KCRHA), and you serve on its Governance Committee. Many have called for KCRHA
to be shut down due to multiple problems and lack of support. Can you provide the taxpayers
with a set of goals the authority will meet which will justify the spending of even more public
funds on this controversial agency?

King County and the City of Seattle recently completed the process to amend the Interlocal Agreement
(ILA). This work reaffirms our collective commitment to a regional approach to homelessness while
streamlining the management of the agency with a single oversight board to improve coordination,
accountability, and transparency.

With the updated leadership and framework of the King County Regional Homelessness Authority
(KCRHA), we are pushing forward on confronting the homelessness crisis and strengthening the
agency to help those in need, while making a clear impact in our communities. As KCRHA moves into
its next phase, with Dr. Kelly Kinnison at the helm, we are committed to learning from those who
have experienced homelessness firsthand, while relying on trained, professional staff to build a fair
and effective crisis response system for every city and region of the county.

The new ILA will create a single Governing Board responsible for setting strategic policy direction,
providing fiscal oversight, monitoring performance metrics, and ensuring the authority is making
progress to fulfill its mission.

Since the 2015 emergency declaration, despite tremendous effort and expense, the
homelessness numbers have grown more than 63% (from 10,000 to over 16,000 today). Also,
tragically the number of homeless deaths has increased annually. These are frustrating
numbers to everyone. Why, in your opinion, has our community failed to reduce the suffering
on our streets?

Homelessness is at its core a housing issue. The numbers reflect the reality that we have not created
enough housing — affordable and otherwise — to keep pace with the growing need. Decades of
disinvestment in affordable housing, increased demand driven by economic growth, and accompanying
skyrocketing rents and home prices, have pushed more people to the brink. The pandemic exacerbated
both wage and housing supply problems.

A year after declaring the state of emergency, King County committed more than $17 million in resources to combat this crisis. This included $280,000 in emergency funding to expand shelter capacity and access in South and East King County, along with the creation of a day center. Additionally, $7 million was allocated for capital projects that added 237 new units of affordable housing, including units specifically for veterans or formerly unhoused residents. The county also invested $10 million in rental assistance, operational funding for affordable housing, and support services to help individuals and families remain stably housed. These funds provided case management, employment support, education, and other resources that help ensure long-term stability.

While these investments have made a meaningful impact, the gap between the need and available
resources persists, underscoring the importance of continued and expanded efforts to address both the
immediate and long-term challenges of homelessness.

In 2024, King County continued to make significant strides in addressing the housing crisis. The county
helped fund over 900 new affordable homes that opened their doors to families, seniors, and veterans,
with an additional 1,248 homes currently in development and expected to open in the coming years.
Through the Health Through Housing initiative, King County has steadily secured 1,350 units across 16
buildings in seven cities over the past several years. As of this month, 905 people are living in Health
Through Housing buildings. In 2023, 91% of residents in permanent supportive housing within these
properties remained housed or transitioned to other permanent housing, highlighting the program’s
ongoing impact in providing stability and support. To reduce suffering on our streets, we need to
prioritize creating and preserving affordable housing, along with funding comprehensive support
systems.

You stated in your 2024 State of the County speech that “it is wrong” to assert that mental
health and addiction are a cause of homelessness. Yet in 2019 a University of California
Davis study, one of the largest surveys of the homeless population ever conducted,
researchers interviewed 64,000 homeless individuals in 16 states. It found that 75% self-

reported as having addiction and/or mental health issues and nearly half said addiction
and/or mental issues contribute to their homelessness. How can addiction and mental
health issues not be considered significant when so many who are homeless are experiencing
these life-altering problems?

Addiction and mental health issues are significant regardless of an individual’s housing status. They may
be a cause or an effect of an individual’s homelessness. But whether the phenomenon of widespread
homelessness exists in a place comes down to whether there are enough housing units for the number of people who need housing. Places with the same rates of mental illness, addiction, domestic violence,
unemployment, and a whole host of other factors may have dramatically varying rates of homelessness.

The one variable that predicts the degree of homelessness is the vacancy rate. (Colburn & Aldern, 2022,
Homelessness is a Housing Problem: How Structural Factors Explain U.S. Patterns, University of California Press.) Places like the Seattle area, with a hot economy and a low vacancy rate, have more
homelessness. Places like Detroit, with the same challenges but a weaker economy and a higher vacancy
rate, have less homelessness. This is a consistent pattern nationwide. Homelessness is complex and
interrelated, and while mental health challenges and addiction are significant for many individuals
experiencing homelessness, many with those challenges in cities with more available housing are, in fact, housed.

The study you cite highlights the struggles individuals face once they become homeless. Addiction and
mental health challenges often worsen after someone loses their housing, as the stress and instability of
homelessness exacerbate existing issues or create new ones. Addressing these challenges is critical, but
it’s equally important to recognize that stable housing is a foundational solution.

King County’s approach focuses on creating affordable housing and ensuring robust services for mental
health and addiction recovery. This dual strategy helps people not only find a home but also build a
foundation for long-term stability. Misunderstanding the role of housing in this crisis can lead to policies
that treat the symptoms but not the cause.

During the pandemic, people were relocated from high-density emergency shelters into hotel rooms, a
shift that became a key factor for changes to our region’s Continuum of Care, which includes emergency
shelters. The UW Hotel Shelter study reinforced the benefits of this shift through data and findings that
indicate this intervention was successful. The findings highlighted a host of benefits related to health and well-being experienced by individuals staying in the group hotel settings.

Violence and illegal drug use make emergency and transitional housing unsafe for other
residents. To improve residents’ safety, shouldn’t drug treatment and psychiatric care be
offered before an individual moves into public housing?

Safety is a top priority in all housing programs, and addressing concerns like violence and addiction is
critical. King County invests in outreach teams to provide integrated physical and behavioral health care
to support housing residents. Supports are always offered, but successfully overcoming all of one’s
problems is not a prerequisite for housing or shelter. Ongoing efforts are made to link people to care and recovery. Requiring drug treatment or psychiatric care as a precondition for housing can create

unnecessary barriers that keep people unhoused and vulnerable. Permanent Supportive
Housing/Housing First is a nationally recognized best practice and has been shown to help people
experiencing chronic homelessness not only achieve long-term housing stability but also improve their
health and well-being by recognizing that stability and safety are better achieved when individuals have
a secure place to live, coupled with access to support services, including mental health and substance use treatment.

Such programs take proactive steps to ensure safety, such as providing on-site services, enforcing rules
against illegal activities, and fostering a supportive environment for all residents. Ultimately, helping
people move inside and focusing on their needs holistically — without requiring prerequisites — is how
we get people with problems off the streets and achieve better outcomes for individuals and the broader community.

Federal HUD data showed that 15 years ago King County spending was balanced when it
came to types of shelter or housing (from emergency, to transitional, and finally to permanent
housing) available to people experiencing homelessness. The same data showed that King
County is now more focused on the final stage (permanent housing) while there are still
thousands still on the streets. Why prioritize permanent housing units over other services,
and has the change had a positive impact on unsheltered homelessness?

The shift toward prioritizing permanent housing has been a strategic response to the critical need for
stable housing for people experiencing homelessness, particularly those who are chronically homeless.
While emergency and transitional housing are essential for immediate relief, we must focus on long-term solutions that provide stability and lasting independence. The need for permanent housing, including affordable and supportive housing, is immense in King County, where nearly 200,000 new units are required to meet the total need in the next 20 years.

We have successfully expanded Health Through Housing. People who had been unhoused in Auburn,
Renton, and Seattle now have a place to call their own, and the same will be true soon in Burien and
Redmond. We’ve acquired 1,350 units and are opening more soon. Last year, more than 90% of people
served through the program remain housed. By prioritizing permanent housing, we aim to break the
cycle of chronic homelessness. This includes a variety of options, from emergency shelter to permanent
supportive housing, ensuring individuals have the support they need to succeed in the long term. The
transition from temporary solutions to permanent housing, particularly with behavioral health supports
integrated into these settings, is crucial.

While the shift has made progress in providing long-term solutions, it is clear that we must continue
investing in all stages of housing, from emergency shelters to transitional housing, and especially to
prevent people from becoming unsheltered in the first place. The increasing number of cost-burdened
households in King County shows the broader need for housing at all levels. Although prioritizing
permanent housing is vital, we must balance it with sustained investments in immediate and transitional
housing services to address the full scope of the crisis, ensuring no one remains on the streets.

Investing in permanent and affordable housing has had a positive impact on those who are placed into
stable homes, but we need ongoing support for emergency housing to reduce the number of people who are experiencing homelessness.

Now that homelessness related federal lawsuits have been ruled on by the U.S. Supreme
Court and the legal dispute between King County and the City of Burien has been settled,
there remains some bitter feelings over sheriff deputies being ordered to not enforce Burien’s
camping restrictions. Some believe Burien was unfairly targeted by the county since other
nearby cities (such as SeaTac and Auburn) have stricter camping laws. What can you say to
alleviate these concerns and are there lessons to be learned from this situation?

This is not an accurate assessment of the issue. Burien’s ordinance failed to produce a clear delineation
of where the camping ban would apply. Because the ordinance fails to incorporate the map that defines
areas where camping is illegal and uses impossibly vague terms to define a criminal violation, it
continues to raise serious Due Process concerns. While the U.S. Supreme Court case resolved the Eighth
Amendment problems with the ordinance, it did not resolve this Due Process component, and King
County deputies cannot practically enforce this until those problems are resolved. SeaTac and Auburn
have provided clarity in their camping laws, and their ordinances would be readily enforceable if adopted in Burien.

The King County Sheriff’s Office (KCSO) would prefer that Burien simply fix the Due Process issues rather than continue to litigate a poorly drafted ordinance and has offered numerous times to sit down with Burien to discuss this, but city officials have repeatedly refused to meet.

Burien’s leadership could resolve the legal challenge by taking the time at one of its bi-monthly city
council meetings to adopt corrective amendments. At that point, KCSO would be in a position to enforce
the camping ordinance just as it does in other cities that have adopted coherent camping regulations.
We remain willing to work collaboratively with Burien, other cities, and our community partners to
ensure that people have the support they need and that our public spaces remain accessible to everyone.

You have announced that you will not be seeking a fifth term as county executive. What
lessons or thoughts would you pass on to the next Executive?

This is something I’ve reflected on deeply since announcing my decision not to seek re-election. As we
prepare for a transition, I believe it’s important for the next County Executive to have the opportunity to
start with a fresh perspective. At the same time, I want to stress the urgent need for leadership that
embraces bold, innovative solutions — solutions that rise to meet the challenges ahead and reflect the
critical needs of those we serve.

One example related to these questions is housing availability. I don’t think we recognized, 15 years ago,
the degree to which this issue would become such a crisis. Our economy was booming, people were
moving to our region from around the world to work in our tech industries.

And while that was a great benefit in many ways, we are now at a point where we’re very far behind in
the number of housing units available at all income ranges. This makes homeownership more difficult. It

makes rents higher. And it causes those at the bottom of the economic ladder to be housing insecure, or, become homeless. If we had really focused on ramping up the housing supply when the economy was revving up in the early 2000s — not just King County but all the cities and Washington state — we would have been better off.

It’s a key part of stepping into a leadership role like this — thinking not only about what is in front of you
but also the long-term solutions you must put into play to impact the future positively. As I look ahead,
I’m confident that King County’s future will be shaped by leaders willing to reimagine what is possible
and have the drive to take those bold visions and make them a reality. This work highlights the need for
thoughtful, transformative leadership to meet the challenges of today and the opportunities of
tomorrow.