I have a more exhaustive post about the push back from supporters of the tax on jobs and why I stand by my original post that there was no report when a report was being cited by Councilmember Gonzalez and the press. I understand the efforts by people and institutions to defend themselves. But as I have pointed out, the Power Point being bandied about as exculpatory is not; I already was aware of that and mentioned it in my original post. Supporters of the tax are trying to undermine what I have written and sourced extensively by pointing to the Power Point. That doesn’t add up. Here’s a time line and the rough set of facts that show why it doesn’t.

Early May — Members of McKinsey’s Seattle office are briefing supportive Councilmembers with a Power Point called “Some Facts” about homelessness.

May 8/9 — David Kroman at Crosscut first refers to the report and the $400 million figure needed to “solve” homelessness. He links to a McKinsey blog post which has not link to a report.

May 9 — The Seattle Times also refers to this same McKinsey post, the $400 million figure, and says it was in a “report.”

May 11 — Councilmember Lorena Gonzalez refers to $400 million figure and the report before voting for the tax in Committee. By this time people in the debate, including Councilmembers and their staff people are looking for this “report” and are unable to find it even until just before the Committee is to vote on the legislation.

May 14 — Still no report has surfaced and the Council votes a compromise out of Committee with other Councilmembers citing the report. By now, many outlets are linking to the Times or Crosscut story talking about the costs of solving homelessness as being $400 million.

May 16 — An editor at the Puget Sound Business Journal says to my colleague, “We’ve been trying to get our hands on it, too. Asked some Chamber folks we know. Nobody has it. Interesting theory about its existence. We’ll definitely keep digging. Let me know if you find anything.”

Later on that day, we get an attachment to the Power Point.

May 17 — McKinsey’s communication person writes: “As mentioned, we’re working on a longer version of the McKinsey Quarterly article on this (https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/meeting-societys-expectations/booming-cities-unintended-consequences). It should be ready in a few days and will make sure to send you a copy asap.”

Later, another McKinsey staffer sends an email saying, “Thanks for getting in touch regarding our research.  Here is a link to our latest McKinsey Quarterly article “Rising incomes, rising rents, and greater homelessness. A longer version article will be published in the next few days.  We will make sure to share it with you when it comes out.”

May 18 — My colleague receives this email with a link which is at the bottom of my Forbes story: “Following up on my email from yesterday, please find attached our latest longer form article, titled:  The economics of homelessness in Seattle and King County.”

May 23 — My Forbes story posts. People go nuts.

And here is just a litany of facts:

1. The post I wrote had many difference sources, some on record and some off. Some of the sources were in the City and at a very high level.
2. The information requests I made were mirrored by a colleague. Several of the requests for information were made not just by me but by someone else entirely to double check the response.
3. When Councilmember Gonzalez cited the figure of $400 million many people wanted to see the report.
4. The only document that could be found was the blog post that I criticized as confusing correlation with causation.
5. On May 8th, the Seattle Times reported that “But Seattle Councilmember M. Lorena González, after reading details of the report in The Seattle Times, pushed back against the chamber’s assertion that the current spending on homelessness is enough, when this analysis proves that it isn’t, she said.” I thought she had the report.
6. When asked for the actual report, nobody could produce it.
7. Sources told me there was a Power Point used to brief staff, but not a report.
8. A source provided that Power Point.
9. Other Councilmember staff (see featured image from a public disclosure) asked Councilmember Gonzalez and McKinsey for the report, they couldn’t get it either.
10. When asked directly, McKinsey communication staff said they were working on a report and they’d get me a copy when they were done, “asap.”
11. Another request to McKinsey for the report resulted in an actual report, or longer article, about 10 days after the first press report, and about a week after the Committee meeting in which Councilmember Gonzalez cited it.
12. No other media outlet has actually linked to that report except me at Forbes at the bottom of my original article.
13. When confronted by the Report That Never Was story, Gonzalez responded that she had the report all along;
14. And then she sent the Power Point to media as evidence that she was citing a report. This is the Power Point I earlier received and cited in my original post.