Advertisement

Previous poll Next poll

Should a day center for the homeless be opened in a residential neighborhood in Lawrence?

Response Percent Votes
No.
 
66% 435
Yes.
 
24% 160
I’m not sure.
 
9% 60
Total 655

Comments

50YearResident 6 years, 4 months ago

(The day center would be used from about 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day. It would provide a place for participants to shower, do laundry, and use the Internet for job or housing searches.)Has this project been thought out? (7a.m. to 5 p.m.) What time of the day or night are they going to shower and do laundry? What about transportation to and from work (if they get a job) and transportation to the Churches to sleep and eat? If they get a 4 to midnight job, will service be provided? It looks like a 24 hour operation 7 days a week at the very least. Please don't sugar coat it until after it is approved. Give us the true picture before we vote to approve this.

Charlie Dominguez 6 years, 4 months ago

Security of the children in the neighborhoods is the concern for all. I don't mind diversity at all, but not at the expense of my kids safety. The background checks of those involved need to be reviewed. What if a dad from a runaway mom discovers the location of his kids... just one scenario that raises the level of danger. Not to mention the stress that those families are already in only be spread over the nieighborhood. And don't tell me that there isn't going to be indicents requiring police. I support both finanically and with hands on voluntary hours, many agencies that already work with the homeless, and Family Promise is too much of an unknown.

crazyleaflady 6 years, 4 months ago

{Just find out who the biggest proponent for the homeless is that actually owns a home and build it in that person's neighborhood.}That person is a retired KU business prof who conveniently lives out in the country. He claimed he would love this in his backyard. I find that a disingenuous statement, because he moved into the country in the first place. It was gently suggested that perhaps he could put it on his land. The suggestion was deflected.

crazyleaflady 6 years, 4 months ago

Apologies for cross-posting, but this issue and the discussion is spread over at least 3 stories.I went to the very well-attended neighborhood meeting tonight.This isn't about whether or not homeless people, individually or collectively, are worthy of help. This is about whether a day facility run by one trained person (but only 5 days /week; the center is open 7 ) and a group of well-meaning, minimally trained volunteers should be opened in a residential neighborhood. The program is well meaning and apparently has a history of success and the folks behind it quite passionate. But they have NOT thought through the practical issues associated with running such a facility in a residential neighborhood, as our Q&A revealed. Many of those Family Promise has run are actually located in industrial areas.This site would not be a house; it would not be a "home"; it is a regulated day center that closes at 5 (at which point everyone's out and the security system goes on), after which the homeless families are shuttled to churches to sleep on cots. Most families, by their own statistics, find homes in 2 months. So there's nothing about this program that suggests that it is more appropriate for a primarily single-family neighborhood. The program is great but should be located in a mixed-zone area.I am annoyed that the issue has been framed as 'accept this program' v 'you hate / are afraid of homeless people'. We were asked at one point to 'open our hearts.' This is a great neighborhood--but it is a NEIGHBORHOOD. This is a great house; why not move a homeless family into it permanently or semi-permanently and let them actually be part of a very close-knit, diverse community? Perhaps as they were on the waitlist for permanent residence or for a Habitat house? There are more appropriate uses to which a home could be put. The fact that it is conveniently for sale, the owner likes the idea (and hasn't been able to sell the house), and the FP folks like it just isn't enough.I might add that no one associated with the program seemed to be taking notes at the meeting. I think they were very naive about what the implications of such a center might be in a residential neighborhood. None of them, of course, actually live in the neighborhood.

BigPrune 6 years, 4 months ago

This is a great idea. Just find out who the biggest proponent for the homeless is that actually owns a home and build it in that person's neighborhood.

sourpuss 6 years, 4 months ago

Why not place it near jobs where these people might find employment during the day? There is nothing going on in East Lawrence.

WWoftheW 6 years, 4 months ago

jeannefrancis;you hit the nail on the head when you said " but the code writing must have been written in the dark because no one seems to be understanding it very well." Only a couple of groups were made aware of the substantially added language. The notice for the Planning Commission did not fully explain what was being presented. Many were aware of the zoning request by the Community Shelter, but non of the Type A stuff.

basil 6 years, 4 months ago

I note that Family Promise has an ad out today for the very person they would be staffing the place with. Interesting.

jeannefrances 6 years, 4 months ago

The poll is phrased incompletely. The location guidelines and caveats are more complex than this. Family Promise is being cobbled up with the Lawrence Community Shelter. The City could have been making supporters out of the neighborhoods, but the code writing must have been written in the dark because no one seems to be understanding it very well.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.