King County and Seattle recently announced they will reclaim responsibility for homeless services from the King County Regional Homelessness Authority. This is welcome news, but it doesn’t go far enough. If we truly want to reduce homelessness, local leaders must recognize that the region’s failed policies must also change. If we do one without the other, we are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Since its creation, KCRHA has been mired in controversy, including the nomination of a sex offender to serve on a board with his victim, failing to pay service providers, CEO departures and an audit that found a $45 million deficit and $13 million in missing funds, to name a few. For years, a minority of elected leaders has called to end the KCRHA, and it’s time the majority took the same view.
But the current crisis extends beyond KCRHA mismanagement — the true leadership failure is one of policy. For a decade, our region has placed an overwhelming emphasis on a “Housing First” strategy to the detriment of more traditional strategies, such as emergency shelter, transitional housing, job training, and meaningful intervention for those experiencing the most severe mental illness and substance use disorders. Proponents claim that if you put a homeless person in a taxpayer-funded home, then they are in the best position to make progress in other areas of their life, and the region will reduce homelessness.
Here is the problem: It is not working. Throughout the county, people experiencing homelessness still struggle in public spaces with nowhere to go. Residents and businesses alike continue to experience the impacts of petty crime and open-air drug use. The push for more permanent supportive housing has only put the problems of the streets behind closed doors. And leaders should admit that our generous policies only draw more people experiencing homelessness into the region.
Statistically, our region is by far the worst in the country when it comes to addressing homelessness. Washington had the highest increase in homelessness in the nation in 2024 (+4,295) and the highest percentage (45%) of people living without shelter in 2025. King County’s reported homeless population grew from 11,199 in 2019 to 18,365 in 2026. Worse, last year the county sheltered 522 fewer people while 2,019 more people lived outside. After 10 years of the same approach, it has never been clearer that our policies are not working.
The hard truth is our region will not make progress with homelessness until leaders address its root causes. Nationally, it is estimated that 67% of homeless people suffer from mental health disorders and 44% from substance use disorders. The actual numbers are probably much higher. Drug overdoses account for 62% of the deaths among King County’s homeless population, and overdose deaths at housing sites are not much better, at 47%. There is no clearer failure of our system to address behavior health needs than the recent lawsuit against KCRHA, which alleges their client, receiving housing and case management services, killed a pregnant woman and her unborn child after repeatedly seeking help for a worsening mental illness. The lesson is clear: Housing alone cannot substitute for effective intervention.
Other regions are showing that progress is possible if we change course. Consider San Francisco, which reported a 22% decline in unsheltered homelessness, 85% fewer people in tents and a 4% overall decline in homelessness. These results followed a shift away from a Housing First model and an increased emphasis on shelter capacity, treatment, law enforcement diversion, intervention and outreach. Portland has also reversed course on several policies, including halting tent distribution, increasing shelter capacity, increasing outreach and intervention, and enforcing its camping ban. The solutions were not innovative, but rather directly addressed homelessness through action, accountability and services.
King County and Seattle have an opportunity to move beyond the false choice between compassion and accountability. We need both. A successful system should invest in a diversity of solutions but not shy away from holding people accountable and intervening when people are too sick to help themselves. Other jurisdictions are proving that these strategies work. Local leaders should implement them here and reverse the failed policy experiments of the last decade.
