Poll: Lawrence City Commissioners will hear a proposal Tuesday night to establish a campground for up to 50 homeless people in a park or wooded area along the Kansas River. Do you support the idea? / LJWorld.com

Previous poll Next poll

Response		Percent	Votes
No		66%	1663
Yes		26%	649
Not sure		7%	182
Total	2494

Delicious
Digg
Tumblr
Wordpress
Reddit
Copy and paste the link:

LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

BS20 (anonymous) says…

Nothing says welcome to our town, please tell your friends, like a free home. Horrible Idea.
May 3, 2009 at 9:14 a.m.
autie (anonymous) says…

And when does 50 become 100? Then 150? This is just enabling at it's finest.
May 3, 2009 at 9:30 a.m.
peach_plum_pear (anonymous) says…

but isn't downtown already a homeless campground? why not let them have a place of their own? the salvation army is closing soon. people without homes are going to have to sleep somewhere, and not dealing with the problem is only going to make it worse.
May 3, 2009 at 9:32 a.m.
50YearResident (anonymous) says…

If they can't get free handouts here in Lawrence they will move on to other places with better accomodations. Do we want to be the drawing center for every bum in the country? I don't think so, this is not a good idea. Cut the cord now before it is too late and Lawrence becomes the next Calcutta.
May 3, 2009 at 10:07 a.m.
jim4hope (anonymous) says…

peachplumpear is right. sure, this camp thing sounds insane, but we've got to do something about the problem, not just yell "crazy" to the first option we see and ignore the issue. if the salvation army is going to close, then the problem will only get bigger.
and no, just like with the illegal immigrants, we can't just throw them all out or expect them all to immediately get jobs and decent housing. the issue must be addressed. don't just complain, think! let's come up with a solution!
May 3, 2009 at 10:29 a.m.
sunshine_noise (anonymous) says…

How many criminals do you think will hide out there? That's just encouraging homeless from other towns to congregate here in Lawrence. This is like admitting we don't have an answer to the homeless situation, so lets just give in to it and let them hangout in our woods, in our neighborhood, come into town, beg and whatever else they may do. Surely there must be a better way to do this?
May 3, 2009 at 10:36 a.m.
smitty (anonymous) says…

Self regulating homeless is what the drunken druggie shelter was/is. It took years of activism from the neighborhood association and community to get the on premise open consumption stopped.

The police are/were called often as are the ambulances for over doses, alcohol poisoning, and the mixture of drugs stolen from mentally ill clients and booze pass outs.

This is the job done by the staff of the10th and Kentucky farce by way of the BOD and Henderson's so called expertise.

What will there be at a self regulated tent site?? No drugs or alcohol allowed...riiight!!

Let the city commission take turns walking the site with a flashlight and a radio to call for assistance as part of their contemplation of the viability of a tent city. How about the same duty for the social workers pleading for this tent city?

Try and get subsidised housing for a mentally ill or addictednowsoberfreshoutoftreatment. There is a waiting list of at least a year for those certificates. Try getting on the LDCHA list and you will find a minimum of two years waiting list. Try getting into the two for profit subsidized housing complexes and you will find massive drug/alcohol use in those apartments. I have seen those who went into treatment, got put into the special housing for addiction, moved on to a for profit subsidized apt, then into dealing crack at Prairie Ridge or Vermont Towers before getting a helping hand back to the streets.

But the social workers are requesting that the city create a tent city, unregulated. Of course those poor people will sign any agreement not to use. It's not against the rules till they get caught.

Kinda like the city commission doesn't break laws until they are caught. The solution is a difficult one since the ones trying to "'help"' are as much of a problem as those that need the tent city. Different economic level doesn't change the abuse, does it?

The quiet assistance of the churches are of more value than all this political push-pull for the poverty pimps.

rant over
May 3, 2009 at 11:06 a.m.
50YearResident (anonymous) says…

If Lawrence allows a tent city there is no turning back. One or two years from now there will be no way to correct this decision if (when) it is determined to cause more problems than the ones solved. Nip it in the bud before it brings our standard of living down to the level we can no longer tolerate and the working people start moving away to better communities.
May 3, 2009 at 11:29 a.m.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…

I agree a horrible idea, as currently proposed. A tongue in cheek thought, however:

Why not put it at 23rd and Wakarusa area? This would give a home to a limited number of folks, but they would be required to do quite a bit of walking if they wanted to make use of the opportunity. Also, it would visit a humorous bit of reality to the SLT supporting, la la suburbanites and might just result in a few of them leaving too (not a bad thing for Lawrence.)
May 3, 2009 at 12:20 p.m.
Practicality (anonymous) says…

The Parks in the city of Lawrence are maintained through the dollars of the Lawrence taxpayer. These parks are supposed to be areas where residents and families can go and enjoy the outdoors. Who in their right mind would take their family to Burcham Park if there was a homeless campsite there?

I do not understand why this proposed camp site has to be inside the City Limits. Why can't it be somewhere outside the city? Land is cheap in Western Kansas. The state should buy 10 acres out in the middle of no where and designate it a homeless campsite. Sink some wells and ship food in if you want to. Have the missions set up shop where ever it is. If someone gets a job, give them a bus ticket to the city where the job is found. If not, they can stay there.

Remember what happened in Topeka a few years ago at a homeless campsite on the river.

http://www.cjonline.com/stories/08160...

P.S. I knew a homeless advocate who volunteered often in homeless causes. He always advised that if people really want to help the homeless, donate to the organizations that provide services to them. He said that when people give money to the homeless, that money is usually used in a self-destructive manner. So, even all you well intentioned people I see wanting to help the homeless downtown by giving them money, it would be better served to donate to a homeless mission or a food bank than to just give the homeless money.
May 3, 2009 at 12:46 p.m.
SpeedRacer (anonymous) says…

Homeless camps are a disaster waiting to happen...from many aspects. They should never be encouraged.
May 3, 2009 at 1:17 p.m.
RiverCityConservative (anonymous) says…

This is one of those issues on which the "tyranny of the majority" must not be allowed to stamp out thoughtful voices expressing a desire to do what is right and what is moral and what is respectful of the human spirit. A tent campground, along with documentation and counseling and transition services that help people re-enter the mainstream economy, would be a very positive thing for the Lawrence community. Or maybe everybody just wants to keep going in the direction of "survival of the fittest" and an ever scarier street scene that is turning Lawrence into a crime capital instead of the beautiful, natural, peaceful place it used to be.
May 3, 2009 at 1:26 p.m.
Practicality (anonymous) says…

Again, what do we do with the 51st homeless person that shows up at the camp? And the 52nd, 53rd, 54th, etc. etc. etc. Where is the line drawn? Or, are we proposing to allow every homeless person in America camp in our Parks?
May 3, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.
cfdxprt (anonymous) says…

I will be at the commission meeting, and for the first time in my life I will be a NIMBY - even though I've made fun of them in the past. Put it out in the middle of nowhere, put it at Clinton, DO NOT put it at Burcham! While I don't have kids, many of my neighbors do, what happens that day when some drunk (or other) person can't make it there and ends up on one of our porches? What will the foot traffic in our neighborhood turn into? Pinkney is a good neighborhood, it won't be with this plan. Want to know one of the reasons I didn't choose to live closer to Mass? The homeless are a problem - this is not a solution.
May 3, 2009 at 1:36 p.m.
shadowbox66044 (anonymous) says…

Absolutely noway what so ever! This is not a good idea by any stretch of the imagination. Helping is one thing, but enabling is another, and this is absolute enabling! 50 will rise to 100 then 200 and so on. All this is going to do is increase downtown begging, which will then spread to the whole city, then the next thing you know Lawrence is getting a bad reputation. Parents wont let their children come to KU, property value drops, crime goes up....come on! This is not going to be a small issue, this is big time and this cannot happen. Plus, how do you regulate it to only 50 homeless people? Is the city going to open a new position for someone to make a headcount every night?
May 3, 2009 at 2:14 p.m.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…

We are going to have to something with the old empTy buses..... they make campers, and numbers would look better if they counted boardings.
May 3, 2009 at 2:31 p.m.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…

Didn't they have a campground they had set up on their own, by the river, that was torn down by the city just last year?
May 3, 2009 at 2:38 p.m.
tonymontana (anonymous) says…

Keep this camp out of Lawrence. Put it west of Iowa Street.
May 3, 2009 at 3:59 p.m.
tennesseerader (anonymous) says…

Make a place for fifty and you will have 500. This is a sure way to make Lawrence an unlivable place for the folks that work for a living and pay taxes.
May 3, 2009 at 4:02 p.m.
none2 (anonymous) says…

Practicality (Anonymous) says…

"... I do not understand why this proposed camp site has to be inside the City Limits. Why can't it be somewhere outside the city? Land is cheap in Western Kansas. The state should buy 10 acres out in the middle of no where and designate it a homeless campsite..."
==========================
If you want to move to western Kansas, you don't have to pose as a homeless advocate with a lame, stupid idea to do so. Just go. I'm sure there are plenty of other stupid people to fill when you are gone.
May 3, 2009 at 4:20 p.m.
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…

jonas_opines
(Anonymous) says…

Didn't they have a campground they had set up on their own, by the river, that was torn down by the city just last year?

---
uh Jonas, you forget two people died there of drugs, too?

besides, do we really want to just let the "homeless" many of whom it is a lifestyle choice, simply take over land they want? that's not right.

how many homeless on the streets of lawrence have no historic ties to lawrence? how many are caught in the homeless lifestyle as self-destruction? if we give them anything, make them more comfortable, we're just helping them along in their self-destruction.
May 3, 2009 at 4:28 p.m.
Practicality (anonymous) says…

none2 (Anonymous) says…

"If you want to move to western Kansas, you don't have to pose as a homeless advocate with a lame, stupid idea to do so. Just go. I'm sure there are plenty of other stupid people to fill when you are gone."

I never claimed I was a homeless advocate. If you want the homeless here in Lawrence so bad, why don't you just invite them into your house? That way it would solve all the problems. My idea is no more ridiculous than having them camp here. If one is a good idea, so is the other.

Again, what do you do with the 51st camper to show up at this camp and so on. Will the city kick the "extras" out of town or will they start a new camp somewhere else? It appears that if you start kicking them out after 50, how is that any more humane than just kicking them out now? Or, if we just start another camp, then we will have homeless camps all over the city eventually. Is that what you envision for Lawrence none2? Either way, no problem is solved.

Maybe I will just move out to Western Kansas, then I wouldn't have to deal with your "bleeding heart" but no practical solutions mentality that pervades Lawrence.
May 3, 2009 at 4:40 p.m.
disgustedagain (anonymous) says…

Wow. 67% opposed. Sad. So much for all the Christian charity in this town. Same people would probably vote down any monies spent on a homeless shelter with walls and a roof.
May 3, 2009 at 5:40 p.m.
newatthezoo (anonymous) says…

How is opposing this idea make some less Christian?
May 3, 2009 at 6:59 p.m.
rckchlkjhwk31 (anonymous) says…

maybe we should establish a fund for waka to get an education and learn how to spell....
May 3, 2009 at 7:45 p.m.
Guardian (anonymous) says…

Two words: John William.
May 3, 2009 at 7:51 p.m.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…

So much for all the Christian charity in this town.
______________________________________

Helping those who can't help themselves is a needed service, and help is available for them. . However, many people choose the lifestyle of being homeless, and I don't need my tax dollars spent on that type of person...period!!!
May 3, 2009 at 8 p.m.
BlackVelvet (anonymous) says…

Guardian, probably you and I are the only ones here who know the name John William.
May 3, 2009 at 8:19 p.m.
homechanger (anonymous) says…

actually helping people help themselves is a beter idea.
May 3, 2009 at 8:25 p.m.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…

good point, Homey
May 3, 2009 at 8:36 p.m.
xbusguy (chris Ogle) says…

xbusguy (Anonymous) says…

good point Homey, provided they want to help themselves...... ( had an after-thought)
May 3, 2009 at 8:40 p.m.
5thgeneration (anonymous) says…

Burcham Park?!?!? As a life long Pinckney neighborhood resident, I'm all for it...................... as long as it's HRC compliant. Most Historic Pinckney Neighborhood residents have dealt with the HRC at one time or another. My property falls within the environs of 2 historic structures. For the proposed camp, I'm envisioning civil war era tents, and all residents clothed in Union Army regalia......... i.e. blue wool pants and jackets, and full length dresses for the women, all provided at no charge by the City of Lawrence. Alcohol must be transported and consumed out of era appropriate earthenware containers.
May 3, 2009 at 8:53 p.m.
cheeseburger (anonymous) says…

That's a good point, 5th generation! After all, what's good for the goose . . . .
May 3, 2009 at 9:11 p.m.
kseagle (anonymous) says…

Um, don't we already have this happen on an annual basis? Called the Wakarusa Music Fest???
May 3, 2009 at 9:36 p.m.
5thgeneration (anonymous) says…

Bush passed the first bank bailout.
May 3, 2009 at 10:11 p.m.
Graczyk (anonymous) says…

I am very sympathetic to the plight of the homeless, but this idea is just bad. Really, really, really bad.
May 3, 2009 at 10:40 p.m.
Graczyk (anonymous) says…

I love how waka1 starts most of his posts with "Dude."
May 3, 2009 at 10:43 p.m.
Practicality (anonymous) says…

waka1 (Anonymous) says…

"dude this has got to happen why do you people hate the homeless and yes it is a good idea to give money to the homeless not to some gredy organisation"

I take it you are referring to the "gredy organisation" (greedy organization) that I mentioned earlier in my post. In that post, I stated that if someone was inclined to help the homeless, it was better to give the money to the mission, shelter, or food bank that actually take care of the homeless. This is a better idea than giving it to the homeless themselves who usually just continue with self-destructive behavior with the money.

Personally, I do not do either, but I was relaying what my friend had told me who was a volunteer for homeless causes. After reading your statement Waka1, I am now assured he was right, and I am also assured that I am right in not doing either. For those "gredy organsation" you are referring to are the ones that help feed, clothe, and care for you, but I believe you would just rather have the money to get drunk.
May 3, 2009 at 10:54 p.m.
VoiceOfReason (anonymous) says…

5th - Bush signed it (which was, granted, a HUGE mistake...he's made others). But it was PASSED by the Democratic House and Senate. Just like the more recent ones.
May 3, 2009 at 11:50 p.m.
nomansland (anonymous) says…

...and Lawrence will continue to be the one of the Top 5 meanest cities towards the homeless in the US.
May 4, 2009 at 3:33 a.m.
none2 (anonymous) says…

Practicality (Anonymous) says…

none2 (Anonymous) says…

“If you want to move to western Kansas, you don't have to pose as a homeless advocate with a lame, stupid idea to do so. Just go. I'm sure there are plenty of other stupid people to fill when you are gone.”

I never claimed I was a homeless advocate. If you want the homeless here in Lawrence so bad, why don't you just invite them into your house? That way it would solve all the problems. My idea is no more ridiculous than having them camp here. If one is a good idea, so is the other.

Again, what do you do with the 51st camper to show up at this camp and so on. Will the city kick the “extras” out of town or will they start a new camp somewhere else? It appears that if you start kicking them out after 50, how is that any more humane than just kicking them out now? Or, if we just start another camp, then we will have homeless camps all over the city eventually. Is that what you envision for Lawrence none2? Either way, no problem is solved.

Maybe I will just move out to Western Kansas, then I wouldn't have to deal with your “bleeding heart” but no practical solutions mentality that pervades Lawrence.
===========================
Just because I don't have a bleeding brain as yourself, doesn't mean that I'm a bleeding heart.

Clean up your own @#(*#$ before shipping it to another part of the state. Do you think YIYBY some how is more palatable that saying NIMBY?
May 4, 2009 at 6:52 a.m.
ibroke (anonymous) says…

Bush passed the first bank bailout-------and Obama voted for it
May 4, 2009 at 8:45 a.m.
Irish (Leslie Swearingen) says…

I am surprised that no one has asked where all these tents are going to come from. Who is going to pay for them? Set them up? How big are they going to be? Is a sleeping bag going to be included? How far apart are the tents going to be from each other? Are there going to be marked lanes between the rows of tents?
I don't think there is any place along the river where there is room to put 50 tents.
I really think that ALL of the logistics should be fully worked out before this idea is given a green light.
May 4, 2009 at 12:02 p.m.
Guardian (anonymous) says…

"MichaelJ (Anonymous) says…

Guardian, probably you and I are the only ones here who know the name John William."

Those who know not history are doomed to repeat it. I guess the attitudes will be different when they find another Richard.
May 4, 2009 at 12:52 p.m.
Irish (Leslie Swearingen) says…

Guardian, I remember the murder quite well. But, I do not believe that is a reason or an excuse to condemn all the homeless for what one man did. Let the blame fall on the one who did it and no one else.
This man was evil in the true sense of the word. He had bonded with it.
It is prejudice to hate someone simply because of the group they belong to.
Still waiting for an answer to my questions.
May 4, 2009 at 1:28 p.m.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…

"uh Jonas, you forget two people died there of drugs, too?"

No, I didn't forget that. I don't, though, see any difference from the others we've had die of drugs and exposure throughout town. The camp has little to do with it, I would opine.

"besides, do we really want to just let the “homeless” many of whom it is a lifestyle choice, simply take over land they want? that's not right."

Meh, my primary purpose in commenting was to point out the irony in proposing the city build what the city destroyed not so long ago. As for the rest, they'll have to be somewhere, eventually. Existence kind of works that way.

"how many homeless on the streets of lawrence have no historic ties to lawrence? how many are caught in the homeless lifestyle as self-destruction? if we give them anything, make them more comfortable, we're just helping them along in their self-destruction."

There's not much to really be done with the self-destruction of some of the homeless. I would suggest, though, that if we didn't at some point give them something, they would probably simply resort to more violent theft, rather than starve. The notion that these folk would magically become productive members of society if we stopped giving them handouts seems to me to be rather naive.
May 4, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.
temert (anonymous) says…

Whatsoever you do to the leasst of my brothers....
That you do unto me.
May 4, 2009 at 1:40 p.m.
The_Original_Bob (anonymous) says…

"maybe we should establish a fund for waka to get an education and learn how to spell…."

No way. He'd be boring then. Let Waka1 be.

If the city provides the camp, then does that make the city liable for what goes on in the camp?

Anyhow, it doesn't appear anyone except LJW commenters are taking this seriously. This will get shot down in short order tonight.
May 4, 2009 at 1:53 p.m.
smitty (anonymous) says…

Guardian and MichaelJ, here's the link to the story.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2003/may...

In case you want to remember the whole story.....this awful murder by a transient was the first of many murders within the native american community.

The last was the LPD killing of Gregg Sevier in 1991.

At the healing teepee on the south park grounds south of the LE Center our natives held a healing ceremony for the community after the bogus justifiable homicide of Gregg Sevier.

At that teepee there were five black ribbons signifying the deaths of five natives, Dawes, Oliver, Bread, Sevier and Settlemeyer. If I remember correctly, all the deaths were unanswered at the time.

Ann Hagendorn of the Wall street Journal wrote an article on the fear that the native community in Lawrence had of a serial killer. Ron Olin then co-authored an article for the KS Police Mag that the only serial in the killings was the cereal in the malt liquor.

So what was worse, young Settlemyer death or the cover up of the Gregg Sevier killing?? Actually from your perspective what was so terrible is what LE officers had to face in the finding of the body. It can't be easy to witness the remains of a child who had been mutilated but come on guys. Get some psyche help and move on or admit your compliance with the rest of the story.
May 4, 2009 at 4:06 p.m.
kidz_r_my_life (anonymous) says…

Have you people no heart? Some of my family are homeless! And it is NOT their fault. They aren't druggies, drunks, or anything like that. When one of yall go into debt and have place to stay....rot in hell!!!!
May 4, 2009 at 4:07 p.m.
smitty (anonymous) says…

My apologies to the Sandoval family.......Make that six black ribbons because I left out Sandoval.

Both Sandoval and Dawes were found in the Kaw about this time of the same year just before Bordman and Phillips shot Sevier while Cherokee Sgt George Wheeler watched.
May 4, 2009 at 4:52 p.m.
kmat (anonymous) says…

newatthezoo - I suggest you go read your bible. Really, go read it. You'll answer your own ?

I live in N. Lawrence. Homeless have been camping out by the river for a long time. Never caused any trouble to us. I walk my dog frequently along the river, never had any problems. They have always been respectful and don't panhandle. Yes, some will take advantage of the situation. Many who need help will appreciate it.

Quit freaking out because there may be homeless people camping near you. Everyone is so fearful of everything. Fear the homeless, fear swine flu, fear fear fear fear fear. Good grief. Take a look at many other cities that have done just this same thing.

Also, please check out the attached. Maybe it will teach many of you to have a heart. If a dying child knows what's right, then what's your excuse? He had one dying wish. Why don't you try to make it happen?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROHnsh...
May 4, 2009 at 5:23 p.m.
kmat (anonymous) says…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROHnsh...

I wanted to post this again because everyone needs to watch and learn from it. please watch!
May 4, 2009 at 5:26 p.m.
Irish (Leslie Swearingen) says…

Still waiting for an answer.
May 4, 2009 at 8:30 p.m.
Summerguuurl007 (anonymous) says…

YES! Clear 2/3 majority. Homeless people get out!

"The last was the LPD killing of Gregg Sevier in 1991."

Wasn't that where Gregg was a mentally disturbed guy who was walking towards police with a butcher's knife in his hands and ignored repeated demands to put it down? And then it was ruled as a justifiable shooting?

From http://www.cybold.com/cybold/hitchita...
With the knife was raised and "off the pinky,"
Bordman testified, he pointed his weapon "with
the flashlight underneath it and I'm going, Gregg I didn't know
what his name, I didn't even know what his name was I'm going,
drop the drop the, drop the knife, drop the knife, and all I can
remember is he's not talking back to me, he's just
going, Mom, I love you, I love you, and it seemed like we told
him that and kept repeating it and I eventually thought to
myself, well, this, this isn't working, me telling him to drop
the knife. I then began to try and talk to him. I said, Gregg I
said, we don't want to take you anywhere, we don't want to hurt
you,we just want to talk to you, and it was not much longer
after that that he said something, I don't at the initial time
that I was interviewed on this I couldn't recall what it was but
after thinking about it I think the last thing he said was, Mom,
I love you, and that is when he had the knife like this
(indicating) and lunged at me and ran at me, and that's when we
fired; that's when I fired."
"I shot
Gregg because I felt that my life was in danger and that he was
going to stab me," Bordman testified.

Obviously it's a police conspiracy. Get real.
May 4, 2009 at 9:54 p.m.
rsmith4901 (anonymous) says…

It is a "no brainer" to be against something like this but how may of you have a real solution. I think instead of taking the easy road of being against this plan you should either come up with a plan to help with the problem or volunteer your service's to help the community.
May 4, 2009 at 10:06 p.m.
LawrenceLover88 (anonymous) says…

I would just really wonder how they would police this area. Absolute nightmare from a law enforcement standpoint. What are the precedents for this in other cities of like size?
May 4, 2009 at 10:11 p.m.
LawrenceLover88 (anonymous) says…

You know, the more I think about it, the angrier I get. Can't we do better than a damn campsite, really? Isn't there a way to set up services, case management, counseling, rehabilitation, relocation, affordable housing, job placement, health care, etc. for each (or a majority) of these folks? I just went back and read all the posts and started feeling terribly guilty. So many of us are one paycheck away from homelessness. Maybe I'm just being idealistic. Perhaps there could be a coalition of healthcare professionals each willing to offer X amount of hours a week helping diagnose and treat health issues, mental illness, etc. I'm not talking about for everyone in the Midwest but the core group of folks we see here every day.
May 4, 2009 at 10:17 p.m.
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…

Jonas wrote:
There's not much to really be done with the self-destruction of some of the homeless. I would suggest, though, that if we didn't at some point give them
something, they would probably simply resort to more violent theft, rather than starve. The notion that these folk would magically become productive members
of society if we stopped giving them handouts seems to me to be rather naive.

---
not naive at all. it takes hitting bottom for many of us to change. if there's a cushion and we don't hit bottom we don't realize the self-destruction because somebody's making us comfortable in our self-destruction.

making someone comfortable in self-destruction is wrong.

also Jonas, your comment sounds like extortion, and the homeless are thus extorting from us.

from meeting them on the street and reading the newspaper, knowing some of their families, I could list for you several people who didn't/don't have to be living on the street making bad choices. one of them is dead, and she's dead of being homeless and on the street; nobody ever expected much from her.

strings have to be attached to services. a homeless camp will attract more out of towners, concentrate crime, and be unmanageable.

***
Irish: whatever.
May 5, 2009 at 12:44 a.m.
50YearResident (anonymous) says…

Lawrence needs to check the ID'S of all the homeless in town to determine where their permanent address is. If it is not Lawrence for over 5 years then they are transients that were drawn here from other States because of the excellent benefits already being given out. These homeless from out of town need to move on. Send them back to their last recorded permanent address.
May 5, 2009 at 7:58 a.m.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…

"it takes hitting bottom for many of us to change."

Yes, but change into what? I still suggest that what many would change into would be more violent criminals. Desperation often works that way, particularly for those who don't see hope in functioning in normal society.

"if there's a cushion and we don't hit bottom we don't realize the self-destruction because somebody's making us comfortable in our self-destruction."

I'm afraid that I find the notion of camping on some random site in the woods to be someone making people comfortable to be a rather ridiculous notion.

"also Jonas, your comment sounds like extortion, and the homeless are thus extorting from us."

I guess it might, I think it sounds like reality, which is usually not very pretty.

"from meeting them on the street and reading the newspaper, knowing some of their families, I could list for you several people who didn't/don't have to be living on the street making bad choices."

Yes, so could I. I'm not sure what your point is. They Are living on the street, making bad choices.

"strings have to be attached to services. a homeless camp will attract more out of towners, concentrate crime, and be unmanageable."

And again, it was not my purpose to advocate building this camp on city money. I'm not sure, though, why you think concentrating crime would be a bad thing. Concentrating it makes it easier to manage, not less so.
May 5, 2009 at 8:32 a.m.
Summerguuurl007 (anonymous) says…

I demand a Final Soultion to the Homeless Question!
May 5, 2009 at 11:11 a.m.
Summerguuurl007 (anonymous) says…

I demand a Final Solution to the Homeless Question!
May 5, 2009 at 11:12 a.m.
smitty (anonymous) says…

Bordman's testimony at the inquest is what you are quoting...

......(Gregg)lunged at me and ran at me, and that's when we(Phillips rightfully backed up Bordman because he had no first hand information) fired; that's when I fired.”
“I(Bordman) shot.....

Gregg ran and lunged but still fell within the length of his body. Someone is lying under oath.
May 5, 2009 at 3:19 p.m.
Summerguuurl007 (anonymous) says…

"Gregg ran and lunged but still fell within the length of his body. Someone is lying under oath."

Oh, of course. It's always like that.
If a homicidal guy comes at me with a knife saying "I love you mom, I love you mom," I'd drop him too.
May 5, 2009 at 4:39 p.m.
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…

jonas,
it is reasonable given the experience of other cities, and knowing that some of the local homeless have been attracted here from elsewhere, that such camps will attract more homeless to our community.

no, our society shouldn't allow itself to be extorted.

fortunately the city commish voted it down, or rather just didn't proceed.

the comments from Loring Henderson and from Tucker sound like really outside reality. Loring thought such a camp would be only available to users of outreach services? but doesn't say who's gonna enforce that!

and Jonas my point was that these people's lives have been destroyed, are being destroyed, by the handouts and the permissiveness.
May 5, 2009 at 11:24 p.m.
dedicatedtomyjob (anonymous) says…

how about this... how about we (Lawrence and the surrounding cities) buy a big friggn field and make it a tent city.. .like a animal reserve, but instead of animals, we'll have the homeless and the bums live there... they can be self sufficient and no one would have to argue and fight about what to do about them being in our city, our woods and the surrounding areas. what could go wrong??
May 8, 2009 at 3:56 p.m.
Jaylee (anonymous) says…

how does one teach a homeless man to fish?
May 8, 2009 at 4:44 p.m.
honestone (anonymous) says…

By the river real estate...
6th and Mass
A nice green lawn
plenty of access to downtown
or 11th and mass
another nice green lawn and supervision too.
This is the stupidest idea
May 8, 2009 at 5:32 p.m.