I love the op-ed section of the paper. I believe we all need to write at least one letter on something we’re passionate about in our lifetime. In saying that, I applaud this reader

I am voting “no” on Proposition 1. Is it because I think it’s the wrong solution to our region’s mental health crisis? No. It appears to be a possible step in the right direction to help address this issue.

But, once again, property owners are looked to as the perennial piggy bank to fund another regional project. My property taxes went up 26% this year alone. Enough is enough! – Gary Weimann, Sammamish

As a doctor specialized in primary care and addiction who has worked in downtown Seattle for the last five years, it sickens me that the most common result of a profound mental health crisis is jail. The most common scenario involves waiting until people hurt themselves or others before we act despite often being able to predict an oncoming crisis.

Proposition 1 is far from perfect. Oftentimes, when people are in an acute mental health crisis they aren’t aware of it and resist any help that’s offered. At these times, they are often dangerous to themselves or others and need involuntary therapeutic detainment. Jail is the opposite of therapeutic and often makes matters worse. The Proposition 1-proposed crisis centers, as I understand them, are primarily being designed for those who seek care voluntarily. This is essential and also grossly insufficient.

I will vote yes on Proposition 1, but I will also continue to advocate vigorously for changes to our involuntary detainment rules and systems that make involuntary therapeutic detainment much easier to access, and that crucially provide care and services for people and those that care for them both before and after an acute mental health crisis.

Nancy Connolly, MD, MPH, FACP, Seattle