EL is just supposed to not care about this plan, cause we are already a bunch of felons? Classic. Have you been through most of EL in about 15 years?

This neighborhood feels like thepoor stepchild and has most of the section 8 housing in town - never complained about the current SA program being in our neighborhood. A little ghettoization anyone? I don't see anyone else volunteering their neighborhood.

What we have asked for is the SA to be upfront and honest with us and we won't have drunk homeless people wondering the streets between downtown and Haskell Ave. It isn't even built yet and already their plans are changing.

OK, just got the chocolate chip pancakes made for my "out-of -school" kids (I slept in). Now, I gotta comment before the rest of my day consumes me (in a good way, that is).

I guess I see some need for hallfway houses, BUT, I have a real problem with our society becomming ever more willing to enable homeless people to stay homeless. Have you ever driven past Salvation Army and there are 15 people just standing around smoking like they are waiting for a bus or something. 1: Where do they get the money for cigs? 2: Good fortune doesn't walk up to your door and knock...you gotta go out there and find it people!!!!! (My yard needs mowed, house could use a fresh coat of paint, etc...) And PLEEEEASE don't tell me they are on disability! Tell that to my hubby who works his booty off doing manual labor (sometimes for 12-14 hours a day) with 4 bulging discs. (We won't go into his other past health issues). Nobody's gonna keep him from wanting to work for a living.

I have an idea, lets let all those people who use the SA strap on some tool belts and build their own #$%^* facility. (And lets do it in WEST Lawrence.) It would tick off a few of my friends but no more of them than in East Lawrence. Better idea, lets put tents up in the middle of the Round-abouts. That way, we can spread 'em around a little bit.

OK, we've hit a pet peeve of mine. But, I feel better now, don't you? WHEW!

Sue-I like the round-about idea. They should use earth tone tents. That way it adds to the area and doesn't make an eye sore.

I have donated time at the SA for many years(mostly court directed) and it's the same people every year. They get their checks, get a hotel room, buy some meth or crack, and you don't see them for a couple of days. Then around the 5th or 6th of the month, here they come. Why not a halfway house? Leroys coming, his buddies might need a place to crash.

"No. I don't think that's a good idea. It infringes upon the civil rights of the homeless."

• Rich Harrison, behavior analyst, Lawrence

Rich, kiss my butt. Their rights? Don't I have the right to walk downtown with out them coming up to me begging for some money to get drunk on. Put them to work cleaning up downtown. Sweeping up broken 40's and trash blowing around. The can pick up the parks and what not. If they can't pitch in, then sorry buddy, no soup for you. They have the drop in center to do laundry, take showers, watch tv, and get out of the weather. L.I.N.K. to get a hot meal when SA isn't searving lunch. What more do they want, to move in and freeload of of me and you. Give me a break. Don't get me wrong, not ALL homeless are lazy drunks, but If I had a dollar for the full time homeless pro's we have here, I'd give Billy Gates a run.

L.P.D. needs to start working more with the ones they see year after year. It will only get worse unless it's fixed. I've seen people at the shelter who have it better than most of us. And some people who are just to cheap to buy their own stuff because it takes away from their party money.

Why don't we build this new center where the new Wal-Mart was going. I live on the other side of the river, and they can build it here if someone would build a Wal-Mart or Hy-vee over here. East Lawrence crys all the time, look at North Lawrence, you can't get more Getto than this. 2 Strip clubs, Liquer store, and a couple of Gas stations. Well I guess we do have a Burger Sling and Sonic. What about that big hole by Tanger, or even Tanger it's self.

Maybe we should treat them like welfare. You can get "help" for x amount of time, then your on your own.

Sorry about stepping on toes, but someone needs to start going off so that other will stand up too.

People who don't have problems find it very easy to judge and condemn people who do (homeless, exconvicts, poor, the mentally ill). I understand the frustration they feel when people don't change or help themselves, but I would plead with you to have a more humble and teachable attitude. Sometimes there are extenuating circumstances that might give you more understanding into their plight. It may do us all some good to remember that we have weaknesses too that someone could just say to us, "Stop being so lazy and change". We would want patience because we are trying, but it is not easy to change.

In no way am I excusing bad behavior. We must expect change, but be patient with the change process and the inevitable set backs. There are many possible reasons for homelessness and the inability to maintain a steady job: a criminal history could prevent one from being hired; a depression may zap all energy and desire to work (and it is not something you can just snap out of); another mental illness such as generalized anxiety disorder, anger problems, or schizophrenia, or retardation may make keeping a job difficult; a drug or alcohol addiction will prevent holding a steady job. Even if a person is able to find a job, they usually lack the training or education to find a job that pays well enough to stay off the streets.

I think the homeless could benefit from the resources available in a halfway house. We need to invest in these people and help lift them; they are capable of getting their feet on the ground. If we don't help them, their numbers will increase. They will be drawn to crime to cope and abuse themselves and others. For the safety of our society, we need to help them by encouraging and financially supporting the institutions that provide services to them.

The Salvation Army is well known for its beneficial programs and concern for the community in which they serve. It seems to me the SA is between a rock and a hard spot. I wonder how successful their programs will be if they attempt to serve these three very diverse groups in Lawrence. We cannot and should not assume that the homeless community and half-way house residents freshly released from prison can live together without negatively impacting one or both groups. The third piece of the puzzle is the one that concerns me most, the youth programs. There is a real possibility that the only youth that will participate are those with no parental guidance, I say that because I know my children would not participate in programs being held in close proximity to the recently released felons.

I think half-way houses are beneficial to many people as a rehabilitation aid. However, I think it is naive to expect residents/parents to welcome such a program in the same space being advertised as a youth ministry.

As good as their intentions may be, it seems the SA may be overestimating the amount of control they will have over the homeless or felons they hope to help. There is no way SA can assure neighbors, parents or the larger community that their children's programs will be safe.

I hear a lot of people quoting half of a scripture, telling Christians that in the world we must be as innocent as doves, this is true but the full verse says, "Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." The doves that are not a wise as serpents when among the wolves are usually eaten up.

By all means, provide homeless shelters, develop half-way programs -- but do it without saying your arms are also open to children -- and blaming the mean neighbors who neither want you in their area nor want to send their children to your programs. If parents are not wise as serpents its their children who pay.

Raven - I certainly agree with you. If you read my first message, you'll see I am calling for compassion and patience. However, I do see trust as a separate issue.

offtotheright - If you look at my second message, you'll see that I said that we should not trust recently released ex-cons to the extent that we expose our children or valuables to them. Therefore, the facility should not be in a place with easy access to children.

All - Why we shouldn't give recently released ex-cons easy opportunities to victimize us. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. What were these guys doing the last time they were free in our society? Answer: they were victimizing someone; that is what got them thrown in jail in the first place. Granted, they were convicted of different crimes; not all are child molesters; not all are theives. But, we can't tell which is which, and we owe it to our children and neighbors to protect them and their belongings from victimization. So, we need to be cautious. Trust needs to be earned on an individual basis, not given freely, indiscriminately. Ex-cons, by virtue of being released from prison, have plenty of opportunities to begin establishing a track record of being a productive citizen. But, even for their benefit you don't put them in an environment where they are tempted severely; that is a fail-fail situation. That is not showing compassion for them or their potential victims. They are not strong enough, yet. They may never be strong enough to be trusted around children if they were abusers. You don't put a recovering alchoholic around a lot of alcohol. Once a particular ex-con holds a steady job and has established a good track record of choosing right even when they could have done wrong, they are then ready to move out of the half-way house.

Many of the homeless will not be elgible for SA services due to alcohol/drugs. However that will not stop them from wandering out east in hopes of an overnight stay or some food. Haskell is a long way from downtown for someone who may be drunk. The T quits running at 8PM. Bus passes?

What the neighborhood has done is request that the SA provide transportation 24 hours a day probaly back downtown for those whom are refused. Thus far no committment. A soup kitchen downtown so the SA can play more of a role in dealing with the homeless as they do now. Both issues could be considered however they refuse to make a committment.

A few months back a child molester was listed as staying at the SA....no one was notified.

Also Mr.Forney stated in a very early conference with neighborhood folks that if they did not build on Haskell the SA would buy the property anyway for investment purposes. Investment property in Lawrence, Kansas??? Now they are asking for donations...seems like money might not be the problem after all.

The folks who who desperately need to get their lives turned around,alcoholics/druggies, they don't want to expend a lot of energy in that direction. Shut the door in a persons face on a very cold night has happened.

Three neighborhoods tried to keep communication on the table for a few weeks after the site plan was approved. However what was missing was committment on transportation and the soup kitchen. Also we thought a police satellite station would be a good idea as well...no go thus far.

Ah...another beautiful day, another wonderful topic.

Why would they put the halfway house in West Lawrence?? It makes no sense. Practically all of the homeless are "living" near downtown and the river. To put a homeless shelter/halfway house in West Lawrence would just mean that they are going to open a facility that would stand empty all of the time. It's not like the hobo's are going to jump in their cars and head over there.

Second, are they trying to make 19th & Haskell "Crime Square"? If this goes in, they'll have the parole office, the Crosstown Tavern (a lovely felon hangout) AND a hotel for the criminally unemployed.

Das_ I agree with you when you said, "why not just force all gypsies, homosexuals, atheists, and mimes into the same building/general area?" That would help clean up Lawrence a lot. Then, one could go walking on Campanile Hill at night without having gay guy's propositioning you left and right. In addition, you could walk down Mass St. without having all of the poor, lost and lonely souls that are just trying to find themselves (or are trying to not be a part of the "capitalist system" - even though the money they beg for comes from that system) hit you up for money. If the atheists were gone then there wouldn't be a problem with allowing those kid's that want to pray in school to do so. Or to say the Pledge of Allegiance. And as for the mime's...well, who doesn't hate mimes!

"Soylent Green is PEOPLE!!!"

"Its peeeeoooopppplllle..."

Well the older "historic" parts of EL have been improving rapidly - it is great to see the old places fixed up and crack houses gone.

But the gentrification and property taxes are chasing a ton of people out. Our house is supposedly worth more than 2 and 1/2 times what we paid for it 8 years ago. (Do I believe this? ha ha) We would really like to stay here and I don't know if we will be able to as we get older and have fixed incomes.

Dont panic, don't_panic the improvements that we have seen and appreciate are hopefully headed your way....

The city does treat us like a dumping ground - they just want the homeless out of downtown, they don't care if we have to deal with them.

How about putting the homeless in a building ... along with programs that help them GET A GRIP ... and a J.O.B.

Then .... put the halfway house somewhere near the bloody prison. Doesn't that make more sense than shoving criminals into RESIDENTIAL neighburhoods, where the temptation to commit further crimes is oh, so obvious? Remember those poor folks on Learnard Street, people! REMEMBER them!

dont_panic: Shouldn't your name be in large, friendly letters? :))

Das_Ubermime: I have to disagree with your idea to "force all force all gypsies, homosexuals, atheists, and mimes into the same building/general area, and mimes into the same building/general area". That would be SO cruel to the gypsies, homosexuals, and atheists!

OK, seriously, having done some work with the homeless (although I'm ashamed to say, not as much as I could have), I think we must acknowledge that most of the recently incarcerated will need some kind of support and/or resources to re-establish themselves in society. Even those who sincerely want to re-integrate often can't do it on their own. We reap a long-term benefit when we're willing to make an investment in these lives at their time of greatest need. But the needs of these people must be balanced against the desire/need of neighborhood to be safe. With only a cursory knowledge of the details, it appears to me that the city hasn't thought the location through very well. And it may be that they're simply dumping on East Lawrence. Besides the Prairie Park area, I haven't seen much development in EL since I moved to Lawrence.

My earlier tongue-in-cheek remark aside, Das_Ubermime, I don't think you're being cold or heartless. I think what you really desire to see from those in need is accountability. Expending resources (or sympathy) to "help" those who make little or no effort themselves means there are fewer resources to help those who really want to succeed. I may be misreading what you wrote and I don't want to put words in your mouth, so please repudiate me if I'm wrong.

offtotheright - Thank you! Thank you very much :)

elfie - Our home, supposedly, is worth nearly $40 grand more than what we paid for it just 3 years ago. We don't believe it either :( No one in their right mind who is looking to buy a house would pay what our property taxes claim our home is worth .. not after doing their homework on the area. East Lawrence HAS improved. Even thru the mire and all the mud the city continues to throw at us .. its still slowly improving .. though the process is all too slow. I'm not sure, as a mother of a 6 year old, that I want to continue to expose my child to the influences of the area. I guess WE should have done our homework, eh? :) Don't get me wrong .. there are decent people living around us. Our particular street appears, to the naked eye, to be pleasant enough. We have a few unagreeable neighbors and the street (along with its associated houses/tenants) you have to take to get to our street, could use a clean up. Needless to say, our little piece of the world suffers from the "few bad apples" syndrome .. a plethora of up-and-coming mini-felons are aplenty in our humble neighborhood! My husband and I have put some serious thought into selling the home (4-7 years prematurely) and taking the loss. But we put everything, and then some, into what we now have. How do you choose? Why should we have to choose?? Its all so depressing.

Centrist - Finally .. the voice of reason! :)

redmorgan - We've been in the area (east of Harper) for 3 years now. We wanted to purchase one of those houses on the west side .. one with a bit more life in it than the taupe boxes you are referring to :) But someone else with better financing beat us to it! So we purchased the (seemingly) next best thing and bought an absolutely faboo house on the east side. We got a grrreat deal (now we know why!) And a bunch of empty promises from the city about improvements in the area. Apparently a halfway house for miscreants and felons is something the city looks at as an "improvement" to the area. Don't know about you, but the image the city sees us in is sooo flattering it makes me blush with embarrassment rolling eyes Girls home, boys home, porn shops, parole office .. now this .. but hey! They built a new fire station just up the road, right?! Yippee for us. Anyway, you have children? If you haven't already, you might want to give this site a look-see a.s.a.p. https://www.accesskansas.org/ssrv-registered-offender/index.do?by=city

Fangorn - I was in such a hurry to get my point across, the first time that I posted on here a few months back, that I didn't really think about using larger, more friendly script when signing up :) My bad!

dont_panic

Oh yeah... I first searched that site and realized that we have a registered sex offender just around the corner from our house, living in that boys' home. Honestly, I enjoy living in an older home, in an older neighborhood (I love my big trees!). I would just like to not worry about taking my son for a walk in our neighborhood.

Let's start from the beginning:

1. Haskell location is too far away from many services like meals...LINK and LMH etc.
2. Where are the folks going to hang out once the SA shuts down on New Hampshire?
3. The police know where the "homeless" live and/or hang out. If they begin meandering through neighborhoods on their way to 18th and Haskell the job for LPD will become a bit more difficult. The LPD actually look out for these folks especially in extreme weather...this will be evermore difficult. The above were our original concerns.

Then others began to worry about all the children going to and from school etc. Downtown keeps this situation in check due to the number of people milling around shopping. There is a lot more people activity in and around the current SA site.

Concerns about property values also began to surface.

We also suggested they purchase some homes in the area and rehab to meet their demands...$1 million could do wonders in Old East Lawrence and keep the existing site for their church activity,administrative offices and food pantry.

Since it appears as though they will be locating in Brookcreek we thought providing 24 hour transportation for those they will not accept was a reasonable request. We thought the downtown soup kitchen was a reasonable request.Not only that any organization that can afford to purchase investment property in Lawrence may well have the means to support both requests. "We" consists of representatives from Brookcreek,Barker and Old East Lawrence neighborhoods. The suggestions were accomplished through face to face meetings with members of the board and Mrs. Forney.

Now a SA Lt. Col claims there will not be a halfway house and that Mr. Forney was not correct although a good deal of time was spent recently examining the prospect. This Lt Col. is a fund raising coordinator and obviously became concerned about the impact of this latest bomb shell. Which information can be trusted?

dont_panic: I have enjoyed the trilogy (quadrilogy? quintilogy?) since I was in junior high (don't ask how long ago that was). I was actually looking for "Watership Down" by Richard Adams at the library. Since it was checked out, I selected a book on the same shelf I vaguely remembered hearing about by some guy named Douglas Adams. The rest is history. I haven't seen the movie yet (!) but there's a mantinee tomorrow, and I happen to be free. :)

Das_Ubermime: You posit good reasons for locating the halfway house near the jail. If we can effectively address the logistics, I think it's a great idea. By "logistics" I mean transportation to and from jobs, counseling sessions, AA meetings, whatever support they need to reintegrate successfully. Any thoughts? Someone mentioned the bus routes.

Has it ever been an option for the SA to remain in that location at a soup kitchen/administrative offices? I ask because I have thought the main encouragement for the SA to relocate was to clear that immediate area for expansions/additions of the lovely lofts projects (talk about price tags!). Who wants to pay that kind of money for a loft that you cannot enter or leave without climbing over or navigating through groups of men, young and old, waiting to be fed and housed. We should also remember the merchants and residents in and around the downtown area. They deal with the alcohol and loitering on a daily basis. Is that an indication that somehow the homeless belong downtown? Don't the merchants and downtown residents deserve some compassion and support?

There is no easy solution, but it is my hope that the people of Lawrence will not give in until we have a solution that will provide compassionate support for people trying to build and improve their current circumstances. As previous posters have pointed out, many of the residents of EL are hard working citizens, trying to improve their property value and maintain and improve their neighborhood safety factor.

Dont we owe the average tax paying citizen the same compassion and support that is being heralded for ex-convicts and homeless people who want to improve their life?

A city the size of Lawrence should be able to provide better service than we have received regarding this subject.

As to whether or not they have the option to remain at the current location is questionable. The SA owns the current building and expansion at the current site was discussed. The idea of converting some Old East Lawrence homes was also put on the table. There was not objection from OEL. Old East Lawrence is accepting and it is closer to many services. However the more discussion that takes place it begins to feel there is pressure to get the SA away from downtown.

Should a 24 hour location be available...absolutely. Is this going to keep a lot of them from hanging around downtown? No it is not for reasons mentioned below. This is a fact of life in Wichita,KC,Topeka, Tulsa,Baltimore,Phoenixville,Pa , Philly, LA, Seattle etc.etc. and probaly Newton as well as Salina.

The Art Center director has stated the the SA crowd has never created a serious problem. You seldom find these folks crashed out anywhere very long because the LPD keeps them moving. They can't be thrown in jail for walking the streets...that is not against the law and obviously not a solution either.

About compassion for downtown business. Hey this is where food(cafe's tossing good chow) and clothing are found. It's close to the LPD in the event a bit of rowdiness arises. If you need to panhandle,this is real life, downtown has the prospects with much people traffic. LINK Kitchen,homeless overnight shelter,LPD,LMH, panhandling prospects,clothing and food from cafe's all make downtown look pretty good.

The new SA will not tolerate loitering at the new location so it's been said. Some quite vocal neighbors closer to the new location will not tolerate their presence if they are found trespassing and have left little to your imagination what they intend to do...this is a bit frightening. The LPD is too far away for this situation and may not be able to provide a timely response.

redmorgan - I know what you mean. There are two of "those" living within a block and a half of our home as well .. waaay too close. 6 Total if you expand by 6 more blocks in all directions. Scary stuff! Its already hard enough keeping our children as safe as possible while away from home. Now the city wants to go and make it even harder to keep our children safe while at home. Go figure :)

Das - offtheright has a point, albeit a bit one sided :) No, I don't want "ex-cons and hobos" running around my already struggling neighborhood here in East Lawrence (call me selfish.) And maybe discounted or subsidized transportation could be a solution (though it appears to me to be only a small part of one.) But I think the point is that its not the residents of EL that want to move THAT element BACK into EL in the first place .. its the cities bright idea. Why pay the "marginal costs" if these "convicted felons" ARE going to be LIVING next to the ones that you love .. no amount of subsidized transportation is going to change that?! The citizens of EL, supposedly with the help and support of the city itself, have been trying to clean up the area. So, does it make since to sweep the garbage back on to the floor when the point all along has been to sweep it out the door?

The city hasn't got a clue. And to be frank, no one else does either .. including me! But there has got to be a better solution than dumping the riff-raff off in to an up-in-coming residential area where families live, and children play.

Building this kind of facility near or next to the Police station makes some since. Building additional rooms within this facility to hold meetings, training sessions, run a soup kitchen, etc. also seems to make some since. Combined with subsidized transportation .. to and from work, doctors visits, etc. .. also makes better since than the current initiative. I would be more willing to sacrifice my tax dollars for this than what has been currently proposed!

Why hasn't the city looked at this option?! Oh, wait .. that's right .. because the further away the "undesirables" are from their site, the less they have to think about maybe coming up with a more reasonable, fiscally viable, and residentially agreeable solution.

merrill - Who's pressuring to get the SA away from downtown .. the counsel, the stores .. THE ART CENTRE? Maybe the future residents of the over-priced lofts that could go into the old SA?? Why should I care what "they" want when they don't seem to care about what the residents of EL want?!

You, yourself, said that these vagrants are drawn to downtown. So how does the city propose to remove these people and clean the downtown area up? Its not going to be by giving them a more residential area to walk thru to get to the good chow cafe's are tossing out downtown! Do you really think that the LPD will be able to 100% back up the lofty promises the SA has made about their no loitering tolerated policy? And, what makes the city think that there have been no objections made by OEL or EL?

JUST READ THIS BOARD :) There are objections being made all over the place.

I've lived in Wichita. I've lived in KC. I've lived in Tulsa and Oklahoma City. I've lived in Newton. I have relatives and/or good friends that live in some of these places still, plus Topeka and Seattle. A 24 hour SA may be a reality in these places, but many of them handled the placement of these facilities in a much better way than we are here! More often than not (but obviously not in every case,) they are not located in areas that are attempting residential renovation.