I really wish they were doing background checks. Although I know that not everyone who is a sex offender registers, I do monitor the website of sex offenders and I picked this area because of the low ammount living here. 20 men - all men?? As a woman, I worry a bit. If they are so confident in the program's success rates, then why don't they do the checks? Is it monetary issue? Are they worried of what they will find?

so the meeting is on the 2oth, right? see you there..

"The lives we've gotten - families, homes and jobs - are at stake and we will fight for what is right."

Jobs? Families? Homes? You're afraid you'll lose all that just because some homeless people are sleeping in a vacant building? Tell me, just how are you going to lose your jobs? Has your employer told you, "You let those people sleep in that church and you're outta here?" If you own a business, have your customers told you they'll abandon you for your competitors? Have you people lost your minds?

I thought Ballard was tougher than this. I also thought it was kinder than this. But it seems neither of those are true.

Sarah68

'What we have here is a failure to communicate...some "men" just don't see'.

The uproar is not so much the men sleeping in a dead church but rather the baggage 'homeless' bring with them. Mental illness, substance abuse, running away from warrants or child support or previous ill encounters, refusal to register as a sex offender. No support because they've burned bridges with family, friends and possibly other 'help' groups. In and out of jail for petty or gross crimes. Refusing a structured living environment to 'living free and easy' until it gets too tough out there. Then you have groups like SHARE whose agenda is to 'house 'em all' without regard to the element they are introducing to the neighborhood.

By the way, how many OR congregants live in the area?

Aren't you one of those who screeches about homeless people sleeping in the greenbel, in abandoned properties or in the park?
So if you don't wanna "house them all" and you don't want them at large, wht do you suggest? Eradicate them?

you maynot require a background check to buy a house..but IF you are a sex offender you are required to register your new address, and your neighbors can at least now that you are in the neighborhood...what follow up on this is being done for those men who MAY be sex offenders and move into our neighborhood? I am all for helping the homeless, but I am also protecting my children and neighbors too...

Statistically your children are far more at risk from you if you are male and from your male relatives than from strangers.
What assurance can you give us that you are not molesting them?

That isn't the only concern, but sex gets people's attention. Say no to the homeless depot.

I have some questions for JottoL. as you seem to be a spokesperson for Our Redeemers.

For the most part the Calvary building is unused. They have one weekly meeting on Saturday, a soup kitchen on Monday and other than an occasional special event this building is empty. The other SHARE shelter on 23rd and 65th operates in a building that is used daily by an active congregation, plus they have a caretaker that lives in the building. The church currently hosting the SHARE shelter coming to Calvary has a live in caretaker and the pastor lives next door. Plus, they have an active congregation meeting in their building. The SHARE shelter that operates on Phinney also has an active congregation and the building is used on a daily basis.

Question #1: How will O.R. keep track of the impact on the Calvary building, grounds and neighbors without an active presence in the church?

This shelter is scheduled to run for a year. The latest info released from O.R. says they will be meeting the men from the shelter for the first month only. Having first hand experience with the soup kitchens that are and were being run from this facility, O.R. does not have a good track record for volunteers helping out long term.

Question #2: What assurance do the neighbors have that O.R. will not forget the men of this shelter and their commitment to meeting the mens needs will not waiver?

"Do they have air condition, or will they be walking around the neighborhood cooling off? Twenty people in a small room can get really hot. Also I thought a public place could not have locked doors at anytime due to fire codes. When getting up in the morning, where will they spend the day? Neighboorhood, Salmon Bay park, Ballard? These are just a few of the questions I would like him to answer."

That's the funniest thing I've read in this blog. "Will they be walking around the neighborhood cooling off?" Well, if we get lucky enough to have weather above 60 degrees this summer, it's possible they might walk around the block. Just as you probably do. Or maybe you stay in your yard, because you have a yard. But if you walk around the block, you probably feel it's your right, because you're not harming anyone, and this is a free country, right? So tell me, why is it that a person who does not have a yard or a house is automatically harming anyone else by walking around the block?

Sarah68 ..... some of your questions were answered at the last meeting.....the building doors will be locked so you can not get IN from the out side (anyone inside can still open the doors to get out OR to let someone in) The men staying there are provided bus passes to leave the area. Some have cars and may go to school or jobs (not sure what they do on their 'days off') If one of the 20 men miss checking in for 3 nights his spot in the building/shelter is then given to another SHARE participant (in one year many men can cycle through this shelter, not just the 20 you may meet the first night it is open.

My biggest concerns: #1..Why the refusal by these men (SHARE) for felony checks and level 3 sex offender checks (they have agreed to these checks in SOME of Shares other venues) This concern became a priority for me when some of the SHARE men at the public meeting described how they, themselves, "screen" other men by asking them a few questions (no proof of answers required) and "IF" the man seems shady they may ask for ID.

#2 Ballard already has it's fair share of shelters in this city. I believe sheltering children, the elderly, the disabled, women, and "families" that have lost their home recently due to the current national economic problems, in that order. HEALTHY ADULT MEN are LAST on the list and that's being generous.

Public safety is more important than the dream world this congregation dwells in. How can importing more ex felons, substance abusers and people of questionable character be of any benefit to the Ballard neighborhood? There’s no oversight or logic to this plan at all.

I agree 100%

It's great to see that the congregation who probably lives far away from this site made this decision.
Welcome to Grummsville!

It's great to see them chiming in, with all their brilliance too! This blog has never been so informative. Thank you all, wherever you are....lol

I'm talking about Small Claims Court - very different from the Mercer Island case.

Type your comment here. JVK: Go ahead and file a lawsuit. The lawsuit against the Mercer Island Church was dismissed with prejudice recently.

Don't forget that there is already an open complaint about the Calvary property on file with the Seattle Dept. of Planning & Development. Service Request #25589 (although it has been determined that there is no violation). However, you can call and amend it with actual grievances. The City is complaint driven.

You can also take civil action against Our Redeemers in small claims court at $5000 per adult in each household. This can be done if the shelter and its residents have a negative impact on your property. E.g. maybe you are no longer allowing your children to play in the front yard = lack of use/lack of enjoyment of your property. Maybe the person peeing in your yard caused you emotional distress and caused you to miss work. If so, get a statement from your doctor and file the suit.

I'd claim loss of consortium, as well. Everyone can understand the result of a lack of safety felt by our spouses/dates/significant others. It may be in jest, but it is a viable lawsuit. I do a block watch, check the doors and windows, then...maybe...;-)
yeah, there's many reasons, options, to take this on, seriously.

i can't wait to observe this meeting. i'm sure everyone will be polite, speak when its their turn, not interupt or talk over others, and not yell.

This move illustrates how out of touch the leaders of the church are. Ballard used to be known for its polluted auto wrecking yards, so now they're trying to install a human junk yard. No wonder the congregation has dwindled to a few lunatics.

Once again, Bum B Gone, rather than sitting in front of your computer fantasizing about those you oppose, get your courage up and make the effort to actually engage us in person. Or just sit through a service sometime. Delusional thinking is not healthy. Hope you get around to doing something about it.

I guess busing in vagrants is one way to fill the pews.

Well you're at least right about "vagrants" being welcome. Even people such as you are welcome, Grubby.

Perhaps all the congregation members could show their actual compassion by moving a homeless scumbag into their own home.

Is Ballard hobo utopia?

Dinner with the looney lutherans? No thanks.

Sorry, Bum B Gone, that you're not open to being around us looney folks. Actually we can be quite entertaining. But I understand. Socializing with people who don't share one's worldview and with others whom one needs as scapegoats can be very disconcerting. Better to stay home and keep one's self-conceptions in tact.

I don't need scapegoats, when is dinner?
Oh, I'll have my own security detail, but, that wouldn't be a problem, would it?

We'll announce the first dinner open to our neighbors probably sometime in June, chopper. Bring as many people with you as you need to feel safe. Would appreciate if you leave your guns at home though.

fair enough.

triple yep!

YEP

No, Mercer Island is 8-).

unbelievable..absolutely unbelieveable! I am shocked and saddened that Pastor Grumm would be so cavalier to put a neighborhood so small in such risk. If anything happens as a result of this decision Pastro Grumm had better have a goot lawyer..not to mention be able to sleep at night knoing he is responsible for whatever harm comes a child or any person in our community by allowing the infiltration of so many more homeless into such a small community. I am shocked and appalled!

Sorry you're shocked and appalled, e/c. But the fact is that if Pr. Grumm and the rest of us at Our Redeemer could find any data to substantiate that having a SHARE shelter at its Calvary Campus was putting Calvary's neighbors at risk, our decision would have been different. You are invited to take courage and come to one of the dinners we will be giving for the shelter residents and neighbors. I think you will leave with considerably less fear and anxiety than you apparently now are experiencing.

JottoL of OR, tell me why these gentlemen of SHARE are so reluctant to submit to active warrant and child predator status checks? I speak to those with active warrants running from the authorities and those with sex predator histories avoiding a place to stay so as not to register as the law requires. Those of us in the neighborhood are held captive to our domiciles and jobs unable to shield ourselves from the authorities should they want to find us, why should it be different for them?

Will you compensate us for lowering our home values?

Better bring your check book......

Is your home still worth what you paid for it? If so congratulations Frantic. Otherwise I suggest you have a chat with the corporate capitalists whose decisions created the housing bubble that has gutted our economy including the value of your house.

JottoL we agree on something!!

Yup, and if we knew each other, we might well find that there are a whole lot of things we agree on despite the critical values and issues we don't agree on.

i don't think anyone has made this point yet:




RABBLE!RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!

carry on.

The horse is dead people. Stop beating it and get a life.

Sweet Rose - you have obviously never eaten horse, otherwise you would know that beating it is required to tenderize it.

But if you mean that those of use impacted by the Church/SHARE should just give up, you can wish but that one just won't come true. The lives we've gotten - families, homes and jobs - are at stake and we will fight for what is right.

A rose by any other name still smells sweet, but wrong headed actions by any other name are still wrong...perhaps you are the one in need of getting a life.

: ) OHHHH the drama.

Common sense has taken a holiday here. I don't care how lofty your ideals for people are, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that importing a group of homeless adult males into a family neighborhood WILL result in something heinous going down. When something bad happens due to lack of common sense, that's not an accident it's called negligence.

Pastor Grumm and his flock seem to think not, and they also seem to be thumbing their noses at the tax-paying property owners who live right next door by going ahead and doing whatever they please with their vacant TAX-EXEMPT property.

Where their logic fails is that this exemption is based on religious grounds and SHARE isn't part of that. This decision will be their undoing, both in criminal and civil courts and in the litigation that will no doubt follow.

I really hope that nothing bad happens to me or my neighbors as a result of the Church and SHARE foisting a group of adult males into this neighborhood, but then again some things are just inevitable. I hope the victims are as empathetic.

Before you or someone else decides to litigate, Common Sense, I suggest you check out the history of such litigation. Your notion that having a shelter is not related to the religious mssion of a congregation has found little if any support in this country's courts.

Ok, last one, really.
The courts have upheld the concerns of communities outside of Seattle, because, they saw it as a haven for those looking to elude statutes in effect, and not protecting the interests of public safety, law enforcement, social services.
Seattle is doomed, if we don't elect change, first, the courts won't have to follow.
I'm serious, if we don't elect change, we'll get the same, by the bucket full. (the stuff we clean from our yards and doorways of Ballard)...

Lock up your womenfolks and your livestock! The Vikings are coming!
Oops, I forgot that you guys are the Vikings. I guess it s a case of bad ethnic Karma.

Appreciate the humor, Laughing. But just for the record, the Viking character of Ballard was never a majority thing, and what there is of it is fast disappearing as older Ballard residents die and young families come and replace them.

Talk about racist...sheeesh.

The best way to keep vagrants off your property?

Put a 'Help Wanted' sign out.

If you're really so uninformed as to think that homeless people are not interested in doing day work, Grubby, put your sign up and let me know where you live. Within a day I'll see that you get all the homeless applicants you can handle. Oh sorry, forgot you really don't want to have anything to do with homeless folk.

Woot!

I was at 'Our Redeemers' a little after 7:00PM to protest but was too late. No one else there. I did speak to at least one congregant, who was late as well, to make my case. I emphasized that I walked to 'OurRedeemers' unlike those members who chose to drive their cars. Also, I expressed my displeasure with the lack of warrant and sex offender checks. Maybe he was one of the dissenters. Rest assured, I'm going to the meeting 20 May at 7:00PM

I'm disappointed that the Church ignored the wishes of its neighbors. But I accept their decision. It's their building, and their choice.

Their choice to be resented by many of their neighbors.

Their choice to expose themselves to (civil) liability for the actions of their guests.

Their choice to accept on their conscience any crimes committed by these folks.

We'll see how it goes. I truly hope that nothing happens, and the shelter works as advertised.

Thanks for your good wishes, BallardDINK. SHARE and we at Our Redeemers will do our best to see that your wish that the shelter works is fulfilled.

It's pretty sad to see so many people who value their naive ideology over protecting children in this neighborhood from possible sexual predators and chronic ne'erdo wells. Yeah, sure all homeless don't fall into that category, but how do we know? The church isn't doing background checks and SHARE/WHEEL refuse to.

Sorry, but safety of the children and working families in this neighborhood outweighs overweening bleeding heart guilt here. If you want to help these people, make a donation to a REAL charity that helps the homeless, not uses them as media props. Or ... host them in your own backyard if you find them so harmless.

The people at Our Redeemers weighed the fears of some in the neighborhood of Calvary that their children and property would be put at risk against the reality of what can happen to people sleeping outside in small groups or on their own. Given the history of SHARE shelters in churches, the majority of us decided that the needs of 20 homeless people outweighed the anxiety of some of our neighbors. We fully expect that the anxiety will pretty much disolve, as it has in other cases, once the shelter is underway. The best remedy we can recommend for anxious neighbors is that they (and their children) come and join people from Our Redeemers and the Shelter residents for dinner sometime.

Don't 'host them inyour own backyard'...bring them into your homes, to their own room or bunk bed and make a place at the table. Set yourself down and feel the love and while you're out have 'em watch the kids.

"Anyone know what these policies are that oppress homeless people?"

Apparently the policies that the rest of us accept to live in a stable, prosperous society: work, responsibility, self-control, background checks and urinating in toilets.

Damn! Thought it would be more complicated than that!

Chopper_74 has landed on the solution - 24 hr. surveillance. An overwhelming majority of people on this forum are extremely frustrated at this recent turn of events. We have spent much time and energy to no avail. Why not channel this energy and passion more effectively? If we could organize a large group to cover downtown Ballard and neighborhoods with troublesome churches, I feel certain that the crime issue would dissolve quickly. On one Friday night two weeks ago, Bike Patrol (a frequent commentator) and three of us from Ballard Avenue patrolled the Market Street-Ballard Avenue area for three hours and managed to get film footage of Toby Bjorn, William Roberts and a pony-tailed friend doing their drug beat. We also filmed a young woman and three men doing drugs in the "Jungle", an area that has since been cleaned up (see an earlier article). Film footage is a powerful tool when shown to the proper officials, news organizations, etc. We have already had limited success. If we could all contribute some time to this, I think the church operation would come to a halt very soon and the drug action would diminish.

Let me know what you think. If there is enough response, I will post a thread on the forum section of myballard.com where we can plan.

Curious how you know the names of the drug beat gang. Please, post your thread on the forum section. I think this is important enough that I'd be willing to sacrifice some Friday/Saturday nights.

Fauxnothing,

It is not difficult to get names. They are known by most folks in the downtown area. Many of us have photographs of them, which have been passed around and submitted to the police. You would pick them out from a crowd in a second if you spent any time down here. They are the ones who go up and down the street, back and forth, looking furtively in all directions at all times, at all hours of the day and night. They are either very brazen or stupid or both. They will eventually get caught - all eyes are upon them.

I need to get more than two responses before I start organizing on a forum. In spite of all the initial uproar over this church thing, it may just fizzle out. As a rule, people tend to accommodate rather than take action.

Thank you and Chopper_74 for showing interest. I'll stay in touch.

Thank you friend. Yes, the community has to come together, and develop the evidence required ourselves. There seems to be little else that we can do at this time.

Also, I would suggest keeping track of incidents/suspicious behavior/activity/police activity etc. Note the date/time/location and if the police are involved follow it up with a records request if applicable from the SPD.
Factual documentation can't be disputed no matter how hard SHARE might try.

Thanks giz, yes we will.
However, it is appalling what facts and evidence that they already deny.

How about we give these 20 people a chance? They seem to have a pretty good track record in West Seattle.

I hope this blog continues as the shelter goes into operation.

Depends on your definition of "a prettyy good record". As in "Bownie, you're doin' a heckuva job!"

Let's see....some of that "track record" in West Seattle:

"I had one man threaten to kill me with his Mac10 after swinging a back pack full of glass beer bottles at my neighbors head. The man told us he was here drinking with his buddies who stay in the church basement. "

"Any time someone has been turned away from the shelter they end up on my property or the property of my neighbors. I had one man completely strip down changing his clothes, he refused to leave my yard. He even urinated in my front yard twice before SPD arrived. I had a spanish speaking homeless man from the shelter use my yard for a toilet with the neighbors watching. It’s no fun to pick up human poop much less dog poop from your yard, especially if you don’t have a dog."

"In the past when the church has opened the basement as a shelter the Green Acres apartments had as many as 10 vacant apartments at one time because of encounters with an angry drunk or an under the influence of who knows what wasted homeless person who ends up sitting at the back door of the church."

"Every time the shelter has opened over the years the neighborhood has witnessed an increase of unreported broken windows in vehicles, car prowls, car thefts, drug dealers on the corners, and numerous nasty prostitutes are working the bus stops."

"I ran off a nasty prostitute who was in the church parking lot offering blow jobs for $20.00 to my neighbors as well as the homeless at 6:00 AM as they were going to work. "

"Every time the shelter has opened over the years the neighborhood has witnessed an increase of unreported broken windows in vehicles, car prowls, car thefts, drug dealers on the corners, and numerous nasty prostitutes are working the bus stops."

"I also used to live in the neighborhood in question…part of the reason I moved was the church and the homeless people they allowed in. For several nights I had noise outside my bedroom window. When I finally went to investigate, I found a sleeping bag under my window which someone had been sleeping in. They also broke into the then vacant property next door to me so they could sleep. I often felt uncomfortable walking my dog in MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD due to the leering stares I got from the homeless people just hanging out around the church.

I went to a meeting held by SHARE when this all first started. The church IS NOT required to help these people get on thier feet. All they are doing is using it as a place to squat, not as a chance to better thier lives."

Yep - Heckuva track record, Brownie.

Shame on society for oppressing these people - those nasty prostitutes should be free to do their "jobs" in the church parking lot.

"The church IS NOT required to help these people get on their feet. All they are doing is using it as a place to squat, not as a chance to better thier lives."

Well, Ballard_Sucks, while the dynamics of SHARE shelter does considerably more than just give people a place to squat, I agree it would be good if we church members managed to do more. We're aiming to get to know our guests and hopefully some good connections will come out of that.

If some of the shelter members decide to worship with us and participate in other church activities, we'd probably have a better shot at doing more. We have the joy of having some people who have been homeless in our membership now and that's been mutually very helpful.

As for the "nasty prostitutes" you'll have to send them up to Our Redeemer's for alas, Calvary has no parking lot.

"If some of the shelter members decide to worship with us and participate in other church activities, we'd probably have a better shot at doing more. "

That's the way, Shanghai 'em for Jesus.

So - the more often that someone copies the same information from another blog post - the more believable it is..... now I get it.

and now I feel safer. or just more right

oh so witty...
an attack is always the answer, when you have no answer...
Now I get it.

Did you even read the blog article posted earlier? Read the comments especially.
http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=5908

I could care less about how they plan to change the use of the space, but I care very much that they plan to change the use of the space at all.

Under the guise of non-profit/faith, Churches take a lot of liberties at the expense of the areas they are in. If they don't want the building, they should sell it. Not slip something in past the zoning laws, and land use regs.

Think I'm going to buy a house next to a church, start calling myself Pastor Dog, and turn it into a strip club/casino.

Great plan, Edog. Please do that. That should keep the friendly defenders of home value and middle class purity busy so that we church people can carry out our mission without obstruction. Actually just a house of ill-repute or a bar would accomplish the same thing.

Try to remember it's 'YOUR MISSION', and stop shoving it down the throats of others.

Yes, it is our mission, Mymble, a mission which we are performing on behalf of and for the sake of our community and city. We understand that some people in our community and city want nothing to do with this mission. We very much regret that you and some others in our community do not appreciate our using one of our facilities to help others of our fellow citizens stay secure and warm for at least part of the day.

If you perceive having 20 people walk through our neighborhood for 10 minutes a day as "shoving it down your throat," I'm sorry. I sometimes am annoyed by neighborhood teenagers yelling on the street late at night on the weekends. Guess we'll just have to suffer such consequences of living in a city together.

Let's see....... TEENS 'occasionally' yelling in the streets at night VS GROWN MEN that can not take care of themselves & staying FOR FREE for 'ONE YEAR', oh yes I see the similarity. HA HA your joking, right??

What about the neighbors around your empty building, also your "fellow citizens", ability to "stay secure" for the ENTIRE DAY??

You have NO regrets, don't bother to state that you do and please, please, DO NOT "perform" ANYTHING on my behalf! Who do you think you are ?

Like you, Mymble, I'm a citizen doing what I think is in the best interests of my community, city and country. You, no doubt, are doing what you think best for your community. Since you haven't talked about what your alternative proposal is, I must say it's far from obvious why simply denying a place where homeless people can stay off the street at night (and out of parks, doorways, people's yards, etc) serves your community's best interest. Are you really saying anything more than "Let someone else deal with the problem? If so what?

that is a good point, edog...

A better use would be some kind of arts and music center for kids.

Or how about combining Ballard's two favorite passtimes and create:

Yoga for bums!

I agree that an arts and music center would be wonderful, especially with so many funding cuts happening in our schools. But, your comment made me wonder whether the church is getting paid to have the SHARE shelter there? If so, it helps to understand their decision.

Yes, they are, and the claim that they are 'relieving a tax burden' is another lie. They are contributing to the tax burden while embarking on this plan. Both directly, and indirectly.

SHARE does not pay for shelter.

No, the city and state do.

true - the city and state provide a portion of SHARE's funding. But where did you get information that SHARE pays for shelter space?

He's right. SHARE in the case of shelters in buildings does pay something to offset utilities and wear and tear. The other gains for a church are increased security, some repair of pre-existing problems, and continued cleaning of the areas used.

That's hardly the windfall that some claim. I don't think you can seriously bring up money as any kind of motivation in any of this.

oh, I will, simply because they have room left in the budget for this nonsense.
No room for beat cops...

Thank you. The truth emerges eventually...

Correct. Nearly 2/3rds of SHARE's entire operating budget comes from the City of Seattle.

Thank you, I do try like hell not to be wrong ;-)
So, as I said, the 'we are lowering the tax burden' is just another lie.
So, where does the city's budget come from?
I rest my case.

Before calling the lowering of taxes a lie, I think it might be a good idea to compare the cost per mat of the city opening and running their own shelters as compared with a church doing the sheltering.

This has been an in our face campaign from the word go, to further funding of the hammocks and red carpets for the career homeless of SHARE. Period.
I'll stand firmly on that obvious fact.
Their actions speak louder than my words.

no,jottol is correct, a church opening it's doors rather than additional taxes to fund a city shelter is cheaper.

Perhaps it's time to make public funding of "SHARE" a campaign issue.

We have an election coming up, no?

Funding for SHARE should very much be a campaign issue, for both the Executive/Mayor.
Keep in mind, Scott Morrow, the man behind SHARE currently has anothe battle brewing with the City of Seattle over Nickelsville. He attempted to take public land back in September and when that failed he hid once again, behind the churches.
He has vowed that when Nickelsville moves from their current location at Bryn Mawer, that he will once again move to public land and build 1000 person shanty town.

yep, imho, and public safety as well.
aka beat cops.
But, be prepared to throw them all out, or this ridiculous fight will never end.
Spineless, effect less, and beholding to all the wrong people.
Can't say it enough...

I just spent some time at http://www.sharewheel.org/aboutus and I'm wondering about the following:

"Together, SHARE and WHEEL educate our community about the causes and effects of homelessness, build bridges with homed people to address those issues, and actively lobby to change policies that oppress homeless people."

Anyone know what these policies are that oppress homeless people?

I don't know what policies they are focusing on.

A couple that come to mind as possibilities are ordinances that prohibit sitting on sidewalks, sleeping on park benches.

For a while Seattle was removing benches on sidewalks while enforcing the no sitting on sidewalks law which ended up putting a bunch of homeless people in jail.

Or how about the cameras monitoring public parks?

Or selective enforcement of the laws, finding any excuse to arrest someone who looks homeless but ignoring the yuppie? Perhaps arresting a homeless person for public intoxication but ignoring the throngs of drunk yuppies hooting and hollering as they leave the bars.

I'm sure there are other possibilities.

Sorry, but I see the opposite, only because a yuppie provides the potential for revenue, the bums do not.
That's selectivity that I see, you are concerned about selectivity that I've never seen.
I don't allow for public drunkenness here.
I do want cameras and beat cops to be implemented, soon.
And I would prefer to discuss how to deal with over-served yuppies as a rule, it's disturbing to say the least.

yes, requiring them to be responsible is oppression. Requiring community service, background checks is oppression. Requiring that they do their part to end their cycle of homelessness is oppression. Those are the policies that they want changed.

Well, chopper_72, I suggest you test this little thesis of yours. You might begin by engaging one of the sellers of Real Change. Arrange to meet one of the guys for a cup of coffee on Market Streetand then share your thoughts on how the homeless conceive of ther oppression. Oh besides paying for their cup of coffee, there is one other requirement, you will need to really listen. Think you can manage that?

Yeah, I don't know any of them, I've never talked with any of them, I've never hired any of them, and I don't understand why they are here.
I'd suggest you pay very close attention to this little test of yours. It will go as we predict, and so will SHARE.

Go enough. We'll see how it goes. If they screw up , they will leave. But don't be too surprised if goes as it has gone in the other communities where they have stayed, i.e., fine with no further hostile reactions.

I have no intent to be hostile, for what it's worth. I also have no intent to let these individuals create harm for my neighbors, and will seek their removal without hesitation if it's warranted.
They'd better take their task seriously, in fact, much more seriously than they've taken our concerns to date.

Ballardmom, I appreciate your no-nonsense reality, and I'm sorry to hear you're moving; Ballard needs more intelligent people like you.

I am very troubled by what I'm seeing in Ballard. I live about ten blocks from where this shelter is going in, so please, don't anyone say that I live in Kent.

Yesterday afternoon, my daughter and I went to a movie at Majestic Bay, and then walked down to Ballard Ave. for some supper. We passed Bergen Park, which was full of people playing frisbee. There were about ten people, many of whom I recognize as the homeless "regulars," but several new folks I've never seen before. They were throwing frisbees out into traffic, as well as taking over the sidewalk, making us feel intimidated as we walked past them. Sure, playing frisbee might be better than some other things they might have been doing, but there was something about the way they were doing it. Voices turned up an extra notch, a certain assertiveness, a challenging vibe.

As hardworking taxpayers, should I feel guilty because I felt a sense of anger at these freeloaders? Should I feel guilty because I just called them "freeloaders" here? They can stay up all night, drinking and drugging, while I get up at 5 am to take the bus to work. Would I want to be them? No. Would they want to be me? No, why should they? I'm sorry, but their life seems irresponsible to me. Who pays for Bergen Park? Who supports the tree-lined neighborhood streets, takes care of yards, pays the bills, so there are lawns to pee on and driveways to lurk in? There wouldn't be hospitals for them to go to if it weren't for people like me who go to work every day. No firefighters to rescue them from their stupidity. No churchgoers to provide food and shelter for them.

What is the correct answer? You talk about SHARE shelters being lousy, but I would really appreciate information about other shelters you've worked with. What can people like me do to provide a hand up? I'm not interested in providing hand outs, and I deeply resent freeloaders. How about mentally ill people? What should be done to help them? I'm truly at a loss, and really torn because I don't know what to think.

Sorry to say this "faux," cause you genuinely seem like a nice person; but you sound out of touch with what is going on; possibly to old to fully understand the wide array of different characters that hang out in and around Ballard. The poeple you were describing that were playing frisbee don't sound like the same "homeless drunks" that have been discussed on earlier posts, and described as druged up, drunk, and generally perveyors of lude behaivior. They really just sound like some of the kids from the Chai House playing frisbee in a park - that may or may not have been drunk. So what, this sounds like perfectly acceptable park behaivior (I know this park has no grass and not alot of room), but nonetheless - can we not figure out a way to not group everyone into this "law abbiding" and "non-law abiding" category. This is not the make up of our society, we are poeple living in a country that prides itself on the freedom to play friggin frisbee in a park. And, if it was the homeless drunks that I know (and love in a sick way) that can hardly run much less play frisbee because they are suffering from the late stages of alcoholism: More power to em for enjoying themselves for once, cause from this commenters perspective--thier's appear to be hard depressing lives. Somtimes the way poeple sound when describing transient lifestyle there are glimmers of jeaulousy, I catch a little glimmer of that in your piece "faux." If you want to get drunk and play some frisbee "faux" you should try it--I personally pay my taxes, work forty-plus hours a week, take an active role in politics; so that I can drink a few beers and play some frisbee, that is The United States Of America that I am proud of.

Check out FareStart - great organization. farestart (dot) org

If you're really willing to consider working with a small group of homeless mentally ill that our churches in Ballard are working with Fauxnothing, drop me a line at jotto41@yahoo.com and I'll put you in touch with those of us who are doing that kind of work.

Congregations for the Homeless is a way to help. It is a program for men that rotates through a group of churches that play host every 30 days or so. The men are pre-screened for warrant/sex offender status. Once allowed in, they are partnered with a Life Coach (anyone can volunteer to be a life coach and the organization provides training).
The men are given shelter in the chuch in the evening and then expected to be up at a certain time either looking for work/going to school/going to appointments/etc. A storage area is provided for their belongings. Before they head out for the day, they are given a sack lunch to take along.
Groups or individuals can sign up to bring/cook an evening meal. Volunteers also come in and cut hair, etc.
It is a wonderful organization with a proven track record. A good place to consider giving your time.

Thank you for this info!

Thanks for the reference giz!

Congregations for the Homeless
http://www.cfhomeless.org/

Actually CFH is a relativley new organization on the Eastside. The work they do is not new.
It is faith based organization that would have been anathema to government funding 15 years ago.
Thank goodness people of faith are stepping forward to take action when the boegey man of Big Wasteful Government scared us all into closing hospitals and community mental health centers. Wish that there was a stronger community safety net.

Yes, worthy of support, responsible, caring for others, and the community as a whole in the process.
Too bad Share has another plan.
They lost what-ever support this community had to offer. Their loss.

Sounds like a good program.

When the city stops using Ballard as its dumping ground for all the city's bums, I'll consider supporting it.

Until then, I'm done helping ANY of the enablers. Maybe if more of the homeless support agencies started seeing their funding dry up, the responsible ones (and the program you mention does sound responsible) would exert some pressure on the rogue groups like SHARE.

oh for Christs Sake!
Some people were playing frisbee in a park and you felt inimidated......
We forgot to tell them that this is the northwest, and we need to speak soflty and process our feelings and heaven forbid that you get together with others to play exuberantly on a nice Sunday afternoon.
You SHOULD feel guilty - guilty that you got your underpants in a bunch and could not relax and enjoy a nice afternoon with your daugher..... Do you feel that stressed by work? Stop feeling sorry for yourself.

Too bad this isn't about Christ's Sake, this is the opposite.
Christ commanded that we not cater to the lazy, but to approach them as brothers, to show them the walk of the righteous, which is not being a lazy bum, or a bleeding heart enabler.
You clearly don't know the walk, or the talk. Just the whole lie.

The beautiful thing about religion is that you can interrupt it any way you choose. Notice you're "bleeding heart enabler" comment and tell me where that is in the bible.

I like that: "interrupting" religion. I imagine you meant "interpret," but your way was funnier.

Religion isn't good for anything but interrupting, in my opinion, but I recognize that the vast majority of people have never figured out how to think for themselves.

Wow, yeah, oops.

I also meant "your" instead of "you're."

Typos galore in that post.

Well, that's not really true. I fully relaxed and enjoyed a nice afternoon with my daughter. And, I don't feel at all sorry for myself.

But, I'm really trying to figure some things out. I tend to process my feelings, yes, and I won't apologize for that. Other people just spout what comes to them; I try not to do that.

I don't generally feel intimidated by people, but I'm very sensitive to attitudes. I don't much like drunk people, and it was obvious by the way these frisbee players staggered around, bumping into one another, loudly yelling, the uncaring swearing, that there was a definite level of inebriation. They didn't care if they overran pedestrians, and were oblivious to whether they hit a parked car with a frisbee.

I think it just struck me that those of us who go to work every day, pay our taxes, and live law abiding lives, provide the place for other non-working, non-taxpaying, non-law abiding people to irritate us. Mostly, though, I really want to understand whether the fact that people support food banks, soup kitchens, and shelters such as this one, actually attract homeless people to Ballard, or whether they'd be here anyway, maybe just less healthy if there were nothing here to offer them.

And, what kind of shelters do a better job than SHARE, as Ballardmom has alluded to. And, am I a horribly bad person for thinking that there are certain rules everyone should live by that help to keep life better for everyone? Like, peeing in a toilet. Like, not breaking into cars and homes that don't belong to you. You know, that sort of thing.

And, how would I feel if a vanful of people began living in front of my house? What different feelings would I have if there were children in the van? Before it happens, I want to examine my motives and be able to defend my reactions. Yes, I like people who speak softly and process their feelings.

Correction: I just counted, and I live exactly 5 blocks away from 7002 23rd Ave. N.W (Calvary Lutheran Church).

Every time this organization has been caught in an outright lie, they send a letter to the press, with more lies, inflammatory insults, and further defiance of what a good neighbor does. They are above it all, though, the poor victims...
We must report all, we must be watchful of that property, and the surrounding property. Just twenty of them, should be easy to cover their every move...
So, be warned, you will be in a fish bowl.

You're right, chopper_72, the residents of the SHARE shelter will be living in a fish bowl. But it is a fish bowl of their own making as they keep watch on each other. The only time you will ever be able to watch them is when they walk from 24th to church in the evening and back to 24th in the morning. If you want to patrol the neighborhood at night, please be our guest. You might even manage to discourage some of the petty crime that has been happening here for years and will continue to happen long after the shelter is gone.

ok, my last response, what you call a fish bowl doesn't hold water. It may be glass, but it is still full of holes, we call that a sieve. I'm talking fish bowl.

You sound pretty psycho.

That heart icon of yours is the lie.

My love is deep, and constant. I don't blow kisses to those who aren't capable of understanding what love is. (Pearls cast before swine...)
Your concern for my heart is the lie.
I've been called much worse, still, I love.

You realize that is barely makes sense, right, and isn't pertinent to the topic at hand?

Where did I express concern for you?

The topic at hand is what this church's vision of 'love thy neighbor' is. It is flawed, devoid of Christ's love and teachings, and to partner with SHARE makes a mockery of his teachings.
You attack me, belittle me, resent my views, all of which has nothing to do with this topic. But it's fair for you to do so...I see it now, you don't understand the topic at all.

"The topic at hand is what this church's vision of 'love thy neighbor' is. It is flawed, devoid of Christ's love and teachings, and to partner with SHARE makes a mockery of his teachings."

Hmmm, now this is interesting. Would you care to elucidate on the above, chopper_74. I for one would be very interested to hear how this particular ministry of Our Redemer's is "devoid of Christ's love and teachings."

Sounds like you are quoting your own bible here chopper, not the one (suposedly) written in Jesus' name.

If you truly love anyone, you require them to be self sufficient, to have respect for their community, to be a productive member of their community, that is what I know of love, especially as Christ loved.
'get up and walk'...funny that, it wasn't ever 'feel free to lie around, we'll take care of you'...
Yeah, it is that simple.

Let me see if I understand your version of the Christian Gospel. Someone approaches you and says, "I and some others want to get off the streets at night. Got a place we we can stay?"

And you respond, "First we require you to be self-sufficient and a productive (employed?) member of the community. Do that then we'll show you some concern and offer you the help you are asking for."

Just out of curiosity where did you come up with that understanding of justification. Most churches I am familiar with call that "justification by works," i.e. prove first that you are worthy of our respect and concern, then maybe we'll care about you. That may be most Americans believe; but it directly contradicts the teachings of Jesus.

First, I've never claimed to be Christian, even if I was, you must be aware that it is a walk that varies from person to person, their judgment, choices, beliefs, actions will be just as varied.
It's between them and their God, and I would find it to be none of my business.
However, if choices, beliefs, actions unduly impact their neighbor, it's a different ballgame. That's where I'd take exception, not so much for their beliefs, but for the impact on their neighbors, and I would defend those neighbors earnestly.
Your assumption of how I would respond to an individual in need isn't fair, but, you have the right to your opinion of me.
I most certainly would have to discuss their situation, where they are and why, I'd want to know who they are, before I would house them, feed them, provide for their needs.
If they were unable or unwilling to be known, I would be unwilling, and unable to help them. I won't put my family, friends, and neighbors in jeopardy for some lofty goal. Nobody is going to call me Mother Theresa, but they won't call me cold hearted either, well, except in this forum, and for that I shake my head, too often, but I'm disliked in general by many, most have never met me. Too bad, because I really do have a good heart. imho.
I'm very unhappy with SHARE, and that's my focus....of course, the church is now an accomplice to their nonsense. Too bad, because I don't much care to be at odds with a church. Take it for what it's worth.

See, that's the thing, these people aren't Christian, they just claim to be.

A Christian would give his fellow man shelter.

It's really not "that simple."

lol yes, silence, it totally is.
Thanks for the bait, tho, now, I have to again apologize, for commandeering most of this thread.
Sorry neighbors, I'll take a walk...

Is that the topic? I thought the topic was that it's turning into a shelter.

Also, while I may not be as familiar with Christ as you are, it seems like, from what I've been led to believe, that he would be all about this idea. Shelter from the storm and all that.

But I guess when you don't want the shelter in Ballard you'll use his teachings to justify your position.

I resent your views because I think the majority of them are pretty far out-there. Like you and the other guys "arm Ballard" business and the fact that you want 24 hour surveillance on this shelter. That's messed up.

I am glad to see that at this church is trying to do something positive to provide homeless people a safe place to stay.

Thank you, Michael. Hopefully we'll manage to do more than just give people a safe place to stay.

Why?

Because there is a need in the community and they are reaching out to meet it.

Because they are living what they preach.

Can you imagine what it must feel like to not have a home or family or friends who will take you in and forced to sleep on the street with the worry that troublemaking teenagers will try to beat you up at 2am?

Because we as a country have been underfunding and closing every other avenue for support for this population for years.

Because we are using our jails as mental health institutions...if the jail is the only safe place for you, then you go find the first felony to commit to get thrown back in as soon as you get out. That is just a screwed up situation.

Because shooing homeless somewhere else isn't a solution.

Because it is saving taxpayers money.

Because there is a need.

Because I have multiple friends who either have been homeless or aren't very far away from being homeless.

Because I've housed friends who would didn't have anywhere else to go.

Because other shelters have run out of funding.

I could keep going...

Michael -

All of your concerns are real and heartfelt. And I believe that many of us in the community have those same concerns. (I have, personally, been touched by homelessness, so I understand well the points you laid out.)

The question remains: why wouldn't SHARE simply agree to work WITH this community and do the background checks? It could have alleivated so much of the controversy. Instead, they railed against us and threw around accusations that anyone who wanted background checks done was "un-American".

SHARE has done nothing but create bad blood here. And Pastor Grumm seems to not get it at all.

Mickey -

I'm not SHARE so I can't answer that question for them.

Let me throw out a few ideas:

1. A background check takes time and there are situations where a woman fleeing an abusive spouse needs immediate shelter.

2. Former sex offenders already have a requirement to report their housing.

3. Going back to the lack of mental health funding for a bit, how do you get a person with paranoia off of the street if you first require a background check?

4. What sort of things are you looking for in a background check? Criminal behavior? If it is 2am and 20 degrees out and snowing, and you are on the street but you know if you commit a non-violent felony that you will have safe, warm, shelter, what would you do? So now, if someone has EVER done that, are you going to deny them shelter and force them to repeat the cycle?

5. What else shows up on a background check? Who gets the information? If you find out that none have committed violent crimes but that all have been in jail will the community use this to give SHARE a black eye? Or what if someone did commit a violent crime but it was 40 years ago? Or what if they have a sex offender status for statutory rape of their girlfriend when they were both under age, both consented, but the parents objected, and later married the girlfriend for whom they were convicted of raping? Is the context going to be shared, or will "SHARE hosts sex predator" be the next MyBallard headline?

6. Did the community offer to have backround checks done on everyone living in a 5 block radius and share THAT information with the shelter residents?

7. The information contained in background checks could be used for identity theft.

8. A background check might trip a flag enabling an abusive ex to find them.


What is so horribly different between a hotel and a shelter that makes the community demand background checks for residents of a shelter but not of a hotel? What is so different between an apartment building and a shelter? A condo and a shelter?

If we don't require background checks to rent a hotel room, or criminal background checks to rent an apartment, or to buy a condo, then how isn't it discrimination?

Again, I wasn't at the meetings, I don't work with SHARE, I don't know any details, but I can pretty easily guess a few reasons why it might be a big problem.

Good insight Micheal; I was waiting for someone to bring up some of these points, when the SHARE rep. said that it would be "un-american" to do/or require background checks, she was making a point not avoiding the point. For some reasons the commenter's here don't seem to see the ethical argument; and think that SHARE is trying to hide something.

ooh...ethical? Do tell me about ethical...please?
And of course they are trying to hide something.
They have failed.
The point she made has been, and continues to be, devoid of ethics.
It's still a matter of life span, and SHARE is in ICU.
No, not a call for funding, in case you plan to extrapolate that statement.

I would respond to you here "chopper" but I don't understand what your trying to say.

Allow me to expand your ideas.
1. There are numerous womens shelters available, most provide for their children as well. This is a mens shelter.
2. This shelter will allow for the avoidance of the law, not an enforcement of the law.
3. If they have a warrant, yes, you will.
4. The cycle is chosen, not forced.
5. What is the fear? The neighbors having info? Sorry, but that's as ridiculous as your analogy regarding 'acceptable' forms of child rape.
6. No, and look at #7 for the answer.
7. None of my neighbors are lined up to steal the identity of any bum. I can't say the same for the bums.
8. It's sad, but avoidable, much more avoidable than what this community is facing.
The hotel argument is specious, first, because it's a unit that requires investment, they don't just give the units away. Second, because they are liable if any harm comes to their guests, including, the loss of their entire investment.
Also, many renters do face background checks, especially if the landlords propose to support a safe community for their tenants.
But, nice try.

The question still remains, what are the neighbors going to DO with that info and who gets control over it?

The neighbors haven't given them any reason to trust them not to use the information for harm.

If I were homeless, what would my assurance be that the neighbors weren't going to post my entire background check on the internet and destroy my chances of becoming a home-owning member of society?

What I read here seems pretty hostile. If I were homeless, I wouldn't trust you with my personal information. You haven't shown any intention to help and have insisted on tools of power and control.

For #7, have the neighbors offered to put up a $100k bond guaranteeing that nobody would leak or misuse the background check information? What guarantee are you offering, or is it just a power-ploy to exert your dominance over them and that you have more rights than they do?

The hotel argument is not specious because the hotel isn't liable for my actions if I come to town, rent a room and then steal from the home next door. They are only liable for what happens on their property. The church has the same liability and carries insurance for that liability.

By the way,
Just the fact that you insist on calling them Bums and not Homless is evidence of a discriminatory bias. Every person has value as a human being, even if you think they are worthless. "Bums" carries implications of a lack of employment, of panhandling, and of many other things that may not be true. All I know is that they don't have homes.

And you are not the least concerned as to why they don't have homes? Exactly my point.
My voice is mine, my perspective is mine, and what I've done on this very issue has been explained at length. You don't know me, yet you believe I have bias. Fair, because everyone does. I apply my life in my way, which, as it is, does not create a burden on anyone else. Too much to ask for? No.
What has this church done to end homelessness?
I'll put my record on this issue up against anyone. I have built homes for homeless, I have funded drug counseling, I have funded soup kitchens, starting at ten years old, with paper route and lawn mowing money. What have you, or your church done, except malign my good neighbors, and myself? NADA!!!
I'm sick of being attacked for having a better grip on this issue. My neighbors are not anti-homeless.
They are anti enabling, anti lairs, anti red carpet.
And I have good reason to support them, over this joke of a shelter.
Say what you will about 'bias', we all have it. I've earned mine.

Chopper_74 -
All I know about you is from the words you use. I'm sorry that you feel attacked, it was not my intent. I saw a lot of attacking of the shelter going on and I see a need in the neighborhood for multiple shelters so I just wanted to offer a different perspective.

Just to be clear, I have no relationship with this particular church or this shelter other than having lived a few blocks away for 5 years and currently living about 1/4 mile from it.

You talk about experience that created your bias. I have experience too and a different bias as a result of my experience, but a pissing match doesn't do us much good.

You assume that I have no care why they are homeless. Much to the contrary, I am quite concerned because I see several friends who have been unemployeed for quite some time and are at-risk of being homeless.

If you don't support *this* shelter, is there a different one that you would support? I ask this because there is shelter proposed for 4 blocks from my home and it needs financial support.

Maybe you could give a lesson in the different ways to run a shelter and the effectiveness of each?

Feel free to click my profile and read my words, I try to be as clear as possible, tho, frankly, my patience on this issue isn't what I'd prefer it to be.
The very first post on this story started with total bs. and was inflammatory towards myself, and other caring members of this community. That's a good way to get my support...not.
As far as another shelter? And how? And would I support it, in word or in deed? Read my words, you will know the answer.

I just went and read 20 of the 60 pages of your words starting at the oldest.

The only description I see so far talks about a 1 strike and your out, zero tolerance policy with background checks.

So, basically you only want to help the people who are already cured of their addictions, mental illness, bad habits, etc. and the rest you "ship off"?

Am I understanding you right? Please correct me if not, because I don't want to defame you.

If you ship them out, where do you ship them to, and how do you ensure that you aren't putting other fine citizens at risk?

In my mind, we really need some long term mental health facilities that are integrated with a shelter system. The drug abuse is harder, you need to give them consequences, but a zero-tollerance policy just reinforces that they are a failure because of their mental and physical addictions. I do believe that they can recover, but it isn't going to be a one-time shot.

Anyway, I think we could use a full thread on the subject. I'd like to hear more complete thoughts, experiences, and discussion on the subject from you and others.

Agreed, and thank you for your input. Another thread, or two, is required. Yes, I came by the zero tolerance stance in my life, not by someone else's. I see a major push to 100% tolerance.
That is, frankly, disturbing.
btw, it's a read, certainly, but continue on, as you see my perspective evolve. Perhaps, it's not the evolution you desire, but it is an evolution, none the less.
My thoughts about a 'sanctuary city' is all encompassing, as well as how to become more than what we currently are.
Ballard, for one, deserves this to be made right. imho.
Mental conditions, let's just say that the umbrella is too large on this issue.
"not guilty, by reason of insanity."
Let's just say, I think any one who harms another is insane.
That's not a defense.
It's a cop-out, for most.

You show such a lack of understanding of the medical issue of mental illenss. You try to pretend that you have an understanding of the legal term insanity. But you don't.
I hope you can find someone in the real world to talk to soon.

touche.

tag -

your IT

MichaelSnyder

Sure asks a lot of stupid questions.

"Because we as a country have been underfunding and closing every other avenue for support for this population for years."

Oh please, 90% of these guys could be given $1,000,000, a job and a house tomorrow and would be homeless again the day after.

So transferring 20 bums from West Seattle to Ballard will help the Ballard community in some yet unknown way?

Nicely put.

I too have housed a friend or two when they needed it.

Everyone has helped a friend or family member out in need.
I've had friends who have lost their jobs and needed a place to stay for a little bit till they could get back on their feet. With a bit of support and a strong work ethic good people will always land on their feet.

When your a good person and fall on trying circumstances your community will come to your aid is all I'm saying.

It's bums who end up homeless not good people. People who burn all their bridges, have no work ethic, say poor pitiful me and hit the pipe or bottle instead of what can I do are the people that end up on the streets.

Who did these people screw over to loose the aid of their friends and family.
You reap what you sow in this life.

They should move in with YOU!

What kind of question is that?

At the expense of the neighbors and neighborhood?

I own. and I can't wait for people like 'Ballardmom' to move away fast enough.

in fact, if you've given up on your community, you might as well look for a new blog out in the burbs to comment on.

btw, xenophobia is fear of all outsiders, not just foreigners.

I can't wait to get away from people like Sick of It who live in white-guilt ridden la la land either. You people are just as bad as all the far-right wing folks who live on Fox News propaganda only you're living on the SHARE and "oh my god - I don't want anyone to think I might be not be compassionate!" bullshit that I see taking over Seattle. Why don't you all go buy some Nighttrain for the Jesus like martyrs that now populate downtown Ballard and maybe even go buy them some crack while you're at it and hang out on Market Street with them and talk for an hour, then go home to your comfy houses and feel like you're so good and self-righteous and you have "helped them" with your unconditional love. As for SHARE - they were asked politely to make a compromise and they threw a hissy-fit like a toddler. I can't wait to get far far away from this madness.

I'm sorry that there are organizations like SHARE and people like you who just make it worse for the homeless because the people who are really trying get stuck in lousy shelters like SHARE that don't help like the actual, responsible shelters that I've been involved with.

BallardMom - I am so glad your not my mom; your kids must be afraid of everything there is including the things not necesary to be afraid of. Oh and the "compromise" you speak of is a background check on all the inhabitants to see if any are sex offenders: You also want us to live in a police state> Maybe you should get a psychological evaluation to see if your fit to be a mother, how would it feel to have that pushed upon you. SHARE is trying to help these people get out of "homelessness" not perform the actions of law enforcment.

Ballardmom isn't dissing the homeless or being a nimby - she said she'd support a more responsible organization's shelter. I find it strange that everyone is jumping on a pretty balanced post.

And the compromise was Level 3 sex offender checks. NEWS FLASH - if you live somewhere and you are a convicted sex offender - you have to register your address. It's not an invasion of privacy! and again, there's a difference between level 3 sex offender checks and a full background check.

The argument isn't whether the inhabitants of the shelter should have "level 3" sex offender checks done on them (maybe they should, maybe they shouldn't); the argument is whether the organization SHARE should do/ or require that background checks be done on them because some residents of Ballard asked for it to be done at a public meeting. Thats not what SHARE does, you want background checks done on the individuals; do it yourself, seriously!

Actually, it was mentioned in the public meeting and then there were meetings between neighbors of the Calvary building, Our Redeemers and SHARE trying to come to an agreement so the shelter could move forward. But in the end, there were no concessions from SHARE to neighborhood concerns.

Every community in the neighborhood of every shelter has requested the same, we, are somehow excluded, discounted and ignored. Need the links be posted yet again???
What a bunch of idiots!
We offered to PAY for the checks, SHARE refused!
Get a clue.
Nope, you'll spout off about racism, nimbyism, whateverism...
You people have no shame.

btw, the courts have required the checks in every other jurisdiction. Why not here?
Thanks, MC friggen Cheese, et al....because we are the toilet of Seattle, simply put, all the crap and a-holes are pointed here.
Sorry neighbors, I've lost it again.
(but I was provoked, imho.)

Dude, lay off of mom, you want some action, it's in the church parking lot in...3...2...1...
And no, they are not looking to help anyone but themselves. The homeless will not be helped, the community will not be helped.
Again, cash the check, and may it bless your guilt ridden souls.

Explain how members of SHARE are trying to help themselves here; not performing a selfless act, and I will see your point. Other than that everyone that writes comments on a blog gives up thier rights to not be disputed, harrased, criticised, "flamed" (whatever that is), and whatever other word you can come up with here to describe how I disputed "mom," because that is plain and simply the point of the comment section on this blog. Here's something funny; find anyone that has lived in Ballard for more than twenty-five years (no one commenting here obviously) - and ask them what the most noticable change is - thier answer will always be the condos. The homeless have always been here, the minor crime has always been here, none of the issues that seem to be the "hot button" issues on this community blog are the real issues because the poeple discussing here aren't real Ballard residents, just transplants like myself and anyone that says they aren't is just lying because its all to easy to do on a blog and too easy to get away with. The only poeple I see commenting on this blog are terrified, overtly tv enculturated yuppies, worried that thier saabs and volvo's are going to get broken into: You've got insurance, deal with it, the homeless are more important anyways because as a wise man once said, "A society is ultimately judged by how it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members."

We need to treat them as grown men, or we will be judged harshly. I cannot allow grown men to be enabled and further their own decline. The weak need to be strengthened, the vulnerable need to be protected, even if it is from them themselves, and then, you may judge how you wish.

These people are not the 'weakest' or 'most vulnerable' and they are smart enough to know how to USE the system and society! They may not blog as much as we do but you can be sure their lines of communication are just as effective! I hate being taken!

I feel really badly for you and the misinformation to hold onto so fiercely.

BIB, Anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view is accused of spreading misinformation.
I don't think that we can lump everyone of any group together, but I'm not surprised that a lot of people are getting fed up because of what they see on the street everyday.

Gee thanks

Oh and everytime you post one of your ignorant, infantile statements (like all the ones on this page) I keep looking at your image of two hands making a heart and can't help but laugh at how silly it makes you look. Should probably change your image to something more apt like a dog pissing on a fire hydrant, man Im funny, hahahhahahhhaaaa!

Share is ignorant and infantile.
I'm sorry that you think my heart is silly, at least I have one, and I'm not afraid to show it. Is there anything that you love? Certainly not my neighbors...

This is what's so annoying about you!!!

Where do you get the right to claim, because someone disagrees with you, they don't have a heart.

Honestly, I don't understand the jumps your brain makes.

lol...it jumps to another drummer...
Perhaps you'll catch the rhythm, perhaps not. That is your choice, from your perspective.
Don't think that mine is vacant, because it doesn't fit in your little box.

Honestly, your words don't make sense.

This is a problem.

sorry silence, I have to make sense to someone, even if it is I, alone ;-(
Open your eyes, your mind, your heart. I know they're in there.

I've hit some vein, but, maybe it's nothing.

Have peace, seriously.

What?

Do you mean "nerve" instead of "vein?"

If so, not really. I just feel like you spout off things without being educated on the topic.

Nothing you have said here on this blog makes any sense, you show no sign of compassion with your statements, and if your decisions come from the heart it is not apparent to this reader - sorry!

Like I said, maybe it's nothing.
Sorry to this reader, but I don't intend to make sense to everyone, because, seriously, are you paying attention?
If so, then you miss the point entirely.

Substance abusing dumb bums don’t add anything to the quality of life in that neighborhood. They are a drain on society.

"I am sick of all the name-calling, lawsuit-threatening, xenophobic morons out there who equate the homeless with sexual predators.

Xenophobic? So homeless are foreigners now? That's right up there with Mike's suggestion that the homeless are a race.

That's the problem when the Looney Left gets hysterical and starts throwing out what -ism they can.

A society is judged by how they treat the downtrodden aspects of that society. Half of the comments on here make no sense; we have had discourse about the homeless problems in Bergen Place, and whether or not crime is really an issue in Ballard, and other than that mostly all I have seen discussed here is a lot of here-say. Really, Ballard should be more accepting of this invitation to the homeless encampment: There has been no problems when it was housed in other locations (including Bellevue) and for Ballard to have a problem with it shows evidence of an even greater problem - the growing gentrification of what was once a working class town. Get over it poeple!

I doubt that the problems will come from the 20 guys in the shelter, but rather from the 40 friends of the 20 guys in the shelter who can't get in to the shelter but have to wait outside.
None of this would even be an issue if we hadn't just experienced a spike in crime that woke up everyone to the fact that we have an inadequate police force. Nothing against the SPD officers, but there just isn't enough of them to do the job and they don't have an organization that is very proactive about street level policing. Add to this that the City has been very coddling of the bums* who do cause problems, ignoring the homeless who could use help, and you have a perfect storm where the troublemakers can make all the trouble they want and the citizens are fairly helpless to do anything about it.
I don't really oppose this shelter in principle, I think we need to do more for the legitimately homeless who need some stability to get back on track, but the underlying situation is such that this isn't really going to do much except enable some of the bums* to have a good time.

*Though most bums are homeless, not all homeless are bums. There's a difference.

Thanks SPG. There is a difference, and we have been handed a situation that makes that discerning harder to make, instead of easier.
Also true, that if the SPD wants to be responsible to the safety of this neighborhood, they need to revisit how it is policed, namely, boots on the ground.
In addition, the 'tag along' element is quite disturbing to consider, for one, increasing the number of bums that can't get in, will be an issue. The number of drug related, sex related, crime related incidents will come from those attracted, more than those housed.
I oppose the shelter, simply, because it is enabling poor choices to continue.
It's not a reasonable or responsible approach to end homelessness.
It's my major complaint of SHARE, in general. And mostly, because Ballard is simply not prepared for the consequences.

FYI, applicants are screened downtown and then sent to shelters - so hopefully they won't have a line of those wanting to get in at the building itself.

Dear SPG & chopper, if you were more familiar with the behavior of homeless people, you would know that they don't waste their time lining up or hanging around a shelter that they know they have no chance of getting into.

lol...more familiar? I don't think it's possible. I see the homeless hanging around Ballard all day, and these can't get into the shelter, it's not even open yet. I do see them lining up for all the other red carpet rides in town, so this shelter is special... how?

I'm talking about the ones that don't care to get in, but just want to hang out with their buddies who are in. That seemed to be the problem that West Seattle had reported.

Then the person who's friends are 'hanging out' gets thrown out. That is a totally fictional scenario and does not happen BTW.
But hey, thanks for helping to spread misinformation and fear! Great job.

I'm not going to play the one up each other's expertise game, I'll just congratulate you for being more homeless than I can ever hope to be.
How am I spreading misinformation by repeating the reports of West Seattle's experiences? Unless that's complete fiction that the neighbors there had problems with people hanging around the shelter. Maybe it is, but I doubt it. If anything, the problems with homeless people tend to be underreported.

Can you explain how SHARE is just enabling poor choices?
If you don't like SHARE, then is there a different shelter or system that you do like?

Yes, there is a system I support, have supported, and will continue to support.
I've had a few things to say on the subject, as anyone here can attest. But suffice to say, every word is archived on this blog.

Yes, and we'll be judged as irresponsible pushovers...great.

No complaints in West Seattle?

http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=5908

-I had one man threaten to kill me with his Mac10 after swinging a back pack full of glass beer bottles at my neighbors head.

-I had one man completely strip down changing his clothes, he refused to leave my yard. He even urinated in my front yard twice before SPD arrived.

-I had a spanish speaking homeless man from the shelter use my yard for a toilet with the neighbors watching. It’s no fun to pick up human poop much less dog poop from your yard, especially if you don’t have a dog.

-Homeless were caught breaking into his camper and sleeping in it as it was parked in his driveway.

-Every time the shelter has opened over the years the neighborhood has witnessed an increase of unreported broken windows in vehicles, car prowls, car thefts, drug dealers on the corners, and numerous nasty prostitutes are working the bus stops.

-The church has had considerable destruction at the hands of the homeless. Doors have been replaced from being kicked in by the homeless.

- I ran off a nasty prostitute who was in the church parking lot offering blow jobs for $20.00 to my neighbors as well as the homeless at 6:00 AM as they were going to work.

-We have gone to the expense of installing a surveillance and alarm system to our property due to the numerous attempted break ins.

Comment by Desi Russell Seefeld

Did you read the complaints from the West Seattle neighbors? Or the Phinney neighbors? Do you like beer cans. littler and human waste dumped in your yard? How about hundreds of ex-con sex offenders on your block? Doesn't sound very appealing. Not safe!

The downtrodden created their own reality by smoking, drinking and being irresponsible.

Can anybody give us some facts here please. Can anybody give us the facts of money spent since the "great society" began to fix the situation? We HAVE been taxed/fee'd/guilted to freakin death already to fix this and too many other problems that government creates. Are they "safety nets" or "hammocks"? Is it a "hand-up" or a "hand-out"? If we all stopped GIVING these folks $$ at off-ramps etc perhaps they'd find something else to do. But then again, this IS Bizerkley North, and we'll get this and more taxation rammed down our throats. We are not being represented very well here in our non-democratic society. Take this neighbors. How does THIS make YOU feel today???

Good, Norwegian, are you sure you are Norwegian? Been back to the old country recently? Now if you want to talk about real taxaction there's a place you should really check out. You might also notice that their cities do not have thousands of homeless people looking for a place to sleep. They work less than we do. Have more vacation, better health care for the average guy. They also seem to be a good deal happier than the average American. Yup let's keep those taxes down. That'll solve our problems.

The Lyndon Larouche fundraisers let you have the day off? If you want a Libertarian society you can certainly move to Somalia where there's been no functioning government for over a decade.
Don't confuse a moral society with a very minimal safety net for a society that is actually willing to tackle the root problems. We haven't even scratched the surface of what needs to be done and I don't think we ever will. What you are seeing on the street are the people who missed the net entirely either because it was too small or by choice.

clown,

we don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic.

and tax rates have been significantly reduced since reagan left office. you've hardly been taxed to death. maybe spend some time in a country where the tax rate is about 40% for the average worker, and not just the wealthy.

I live right near this church, and I am 100% in favor of it being used as a shelter.

I am sick of all the name-calling, lawsuit-threatening, xenophobic morons out there who equate the homeless with sexual predators.

many of you people really need to get a life yourselves and stop worrying that the world is changing around you. if you want to do surveillance 24/7, then be my guest.

I live within four blocks of the church think that you are 100% full of Sh**.

There is no way someone/anyone who really lives near the church is for this.

Thanks for your permission, 24/7 surveillance will occur, Count on it.

The people I know who are against having SHARE host a shelter do not think all homeless are sexual predators by any stretch. We do think that SHARE is irresponsible and reactionary and a bad neighbor. Most of us would support a shelter if it were run responsibly and with accountability. Having been homeless and worked with the homeless, I know that a free crash pad without accountability except to your bros is not helpful to anyone including the homeless involved. Accountability and compromise are part of our society and that's just the way it is - to say the homeless are victims and shouldn't live up to that responsibility does them a terrible injustice. Even my neighbor who is an MSW and has worked with the homeless for decades agrees that SHARE is a shady, unhelpful organization.

There are a lot of well-run, responsible organization that really do have a great record of helping the homeless in this city. Most of us neighbors would welcome and gladly support them.

Please take a moment to stop spewing propaganda that you hear from your nice house that I will bet you anything you do not have small children living in and deal with reality - not a philosophical concept that won't affect you when you turn off your computer.

You are much more helpful to the homeless if you realize they are all individuals and like any group of individuals have responsible folks and really screwed up/dangerous folks. Unfortunately, there is a higher ratio of screwed up/dangerous folks in homeless populations than responsible down on their luck folks. That is just a sad fact. And one that I have personally lived - not one that I ignore because I've never been in the trenches and it makes me feel less guilty to just think anyone who I consider is a "victim" is a beautiful misguided soul who has just been oppressed by the man.

Ballardmom - beautiful post. Thanks for encapsulating my thoughts as well - in a much better way than I ever could have.

"You are much more helpful to the homeless if you realize they are all individuals..."

But I've HAD IT with being helpful to the homeless. I don't want to be helpful, and I'm not going to be. My limit has been reached, exceeeded, and I'm done with that.

As far as I'm concerned, the homeless can go to hell. And so can all their enablers.

I used to be very supportive of programs to aid the homeless. I've helped out individuals, I've regularly donated time and money to agencies that are dedicated to helping the homeless.

Not any more.

Why? Because Ballard has done way more than our fair share. There is NO reason for Balrd to be this city's dumping ground for bums, yes BUMS, and that's exactly what Ballard has become.

When the city starts distributing the scumbags across other neighborhoods instead of flushing them all here, then and only then will my compassion return. Until then, ALL the homeless and the homeless-support networks can go to hell, and I urge everyone else who cares about tis neighborhood to take a similar stand, and let these enablers know why you have withdrawn your support and started to oppose them.

Don't like it? Tough.

Thanks for the theological reflection, Ballard_Sucks_Now. But as a matter of fact, churches like Trinity Methodist and Our Redeemers are doing quite well and will not likely being going to hell anytime soon..

Sorry you burnt out. Maybe you tried to do too much on your own. Good ol Northwest American individualism, no doubt, has some admirable aspects, but it's ability to deal with serious social problems is not one of them. When you get right down to it, people who do not participate in a network or community simply do not have the where-with-all to impliment or stop social strategies. But don't give up, maybe you can get some people together who can meet each Sunday and plot how to keep Ballard free of America's social problems. Call up the local Republican Party. Maybe they'll agree to put up one of those fences they're so fond of.

You have been homeless? I don t think that the comments of a former drug addicted prostitute should be published or relevant to this forum.
This is a decent community and people with a past like yours should not be here. Women like you are the beacon which attract the scum we are currently dealing with.

I trust that the majority of us participating in this blog will agree, SickOfDruggies, you win! I don't think anyone - at least during the past few days - has been anywhere near as self-righteous as you.

I'd wager that most people share this more nuanced view of the situation, but those people aren't likely to post a comment simply accepting reality. The extremists in both directions are the ones who comment giving the impression that the community is a bunch of extremists.

Rent or own?

That's totally irrelevant, not to mention unfair. Not everyone can afford a $400,000 home in Ballard. I rent my place and have just as much antipathy for SHARE's tactics as anyone. I'd also be willing to bet I've been more active in my neighborhoo'd issues than you have. Some of your prejudice's are really ridiculous.

Get off your high horse and stick to the topic. Unless all you really want to do is start a class war over who can afford to own and who can't.

Good for you Mickey, I'm with you.

"with you" as in...someone who has no real stake in this neighborhood, and who will move along to someplace else when there's a trendy new bar opened?

The point is that homeowners have a BIG stake in this neighborhood. Renters may or may not, but it's much easier for them to walk away when the place turns to crap.

Maybe that's why "Mickey" has so much empathy for the bums...

Your comments are just inane. And stop mischaracterizing things I've written. I've seen both sides of the homelessness issue, up close. I very much doubt you have. I;ve also been calling for SHARE to work with the community and agree to the background checks. Maybe you need to pay better attention.

As for your silly little class war against renters, it's tiresome and irrelevant. But I'm sure you'll keep it up as long as you have nothing of value to add to the conversation. This way, you get to be provocative, which, in the end, is really all you've got.

Finally, there's no need for you to put my name in quotes. I use my real name on this blog, which is more than I can say for you, hiding behind your (cough) ironic use of the name "Vagrant".

***Geeky Swedes: This is why I stopped commenting on this blog for more than a month. It seems impossible to hold a substantive conversation about homelessness without having to wade through the vileness that's spewed here by those who only want to start fights.

Eeeeew.

Proud Ballard resident for the past15+ years.

I have a *big* stake in Ballard and how dare you just assume that I do not, are you my neighbor? Would you speak to me on the street like that and make those assumptions without the internet as your hiding place...I think not.

I'm the one who volunteers, walks & drivves kids to school, teaches them manners and makes them and all their friends wear HELMETS (other parents where are you on this) when on wheels. Taxi the kids @ when it gets dark outside. Been in softaball, baseball, basketball and arts through Ballard CC or Loyal heights CC. I also volunteered every single year, elementary and middle.
I buy and read the real change newspaper. Use the library. Pay my utils at the service center. Engage with my neighbors and want to help those that are less fortunate or made wrong turns where I made right.

Ballard_Sucks_Now is a great example of who I want to avoid in Ballard and exactly the new condo trendy "I'll take you over then tell you how it's going to be" attitude that *would* drive me from my home of 15+ years not a freakin' shelter..get real.

There was a time not long ago that a good portion of the 'drunk & homeless' in Ballard were fishermen. No one complained then because mostly we knew em....and we were a sleepy little fishing village...

And you make incorrect guesses about me - I've lived here far longer than you. No condo.

It's not a high horse, it's fact. You can't be lazy, waiting for the next round of handouts, and still afford to buy a house, anywhere.
But we should give them away, to the laziest of us...no logic, no benefit to anyone, especially the career lazy. What a disservice to all, appalling.

Not everyone who can't afford to buy a house is lazy. Chopper, I'm surprised at how sweeping your generalizations have become. I've agreed with you a lot in the past but not on this one.

Sorry, with reference to career homeless, I'm spot on. How dare they expect someone else to provide housing. Asking, requesting, working toward that goal themselves is what is required. This is not what the issue is, this is demanding, in our faces, and they started my angst by maligning my good neighbors in this forum, and in print. They can and will deal with the result.

Chopper74 - Your response doesn't even make sense in relation to my comment.

Are you really suggesting that all renters are lazy people waiting for handouts? If so, that's one of the more ridiculous and offensive things I've read from you. You are usually a bit more reflective than that.

I won't bore you with all the years I ran my own business and still worked a second job in order to make ends meet and save something for the future. This argument about homeowners vs. renters will solve nothing. I can promise that.

I'm not disseminating rent vs. buy. I'm explaining that a roof requires effort, as any fool should know. The lazy, if they have a roof of any kind, is due to enabling. That is wrong.

Or sleep in a moldy Winnebago with expired plates?

Some churches in Ballard are considering how to help people living in their cars or other vehicles. St. Luke's Episcopal Church is working with one gentleman and doing a good job of it. But those of us living near Calvary need not worry. As those of us who live in the neighborhood know, Calvary has no parking lot.

You should quit bitchin and call the abandoned vehicle # or non emergency police. I've always had luck with that approach ad I didn't need a crowd of listeners to pat me o the back when I did it or worse, your technique...bitch whine and *do nothing*.

There are no moldy old Winnebagos with bums living inside parked on my block. If/when that happens, you can be sure I won't simply stand by and let it go on.

The issue isn't even the shelter. It's the fact that SHARE is using the emotional issue of "privacy" to escape their responsibility to the community. I have no problem with a group of men using temporary housing in my area. But to say that the homeless in general are a kind bunch of jolly misfits is a stretch. I'm sure that people using shelters understand that they are privilege to use, with that comes a background check. SHARE giving people a good looking over as a check is a total farce, "don't judge a book by its cover" right? A total lack of accountability and responsibility that is the issue.

.....to say that the homeless in general are a kind bunch of jolly misfits is a stretch." Who's saying that, Notah8er? Among the homeless, thanks to US social policy regarding adicts and the mentally ill, many of the homeless are seriously disturbed and not acceptable residents in any normal residential situation. We do have a few places in Seattle that do a good job with the mentally ill - we have a special shelter for some such people in Ballard that does a fair job of giving them a safe place off the street each night. And there are a few places in Seattle where active alcoholics can live but not enough. But SHARE is no solution for such people. It simply doesn't take them. And if someone who has been accepted shows up high or drunk, they are escorted out of the shelter, put on a bus, and not allowed to come back.

privacy is not an emotional issue -

SHARE has been priven to be liars. This is an objective fact.

The church leadership have been deceptive and manipulative -- this is EXACTLY the outcome we knew was coming, with their little charade of having a secret vote among their "congregation" just a little bit of theater to help them spin what was a foregone conclusion.

This "church" is nothing but a front for liars and sleazebags.

The whole way they orchestrated this shows nothing but contemmpt for the community. I suggest the community respond in kind.

This church is in it for the windfall, more welfare than their current tax havens allow for. It's greed, and it should not come without a heavy price.

A windfall? That's really funny. Come to Our Redeemer's some Sunday and ask to talk to someone on our finance committee. I'm sure they'll be amused to talk to you about all the money the congregation will be bringing in. It might just cover the cost of the heating and electricity, maybe.

The heavy price will be less funding for SHARE, not more, as is anticipated. At a time when the community is the only hope for future funding of SHARE, they shown themselves to be pathetic, and unsupportable, imho. I predict that they pivot, or perish.

Based on your lack of historical knowledge of this group and your ignornance of the workings of this City and just general short sightedness your predictions are more like spit in the wind.

oh, my friend, I'm not ignorant, at all. I know how this city works, and it has to change, period.
have a nice day.

"This is a lovely 3 bedroom 1 1/2 bath, 1927 Craftsman. All new appliances, furnace and water heater. Kitchen tastefully redone with granite countertops. Hard wood floors throughout and a fully finished basement.

Oh that? That's the neighborhood homeless shelter. It comes with hot and cold running vagrants and the occasional pyschotic, rejected vagrants and if you're really lucky, the occasional sex offender.

Would you like to make an offer?"

Give a man a fish feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish feed him for life.

Give a bum a free place to stay and a couple square meals a day...

Who needs to be a productive member of society any more hand outs are coming.

I think most, if not all, of these guys fish. Must not fish enough, though.

If by fish you mean drink booz like a fish then I think your right.

Being an active alcoholic will exclude a person from getting into and staying in a SHARE shelter, JB.

Oh really....who's doing the screening on that??? Do they blow into a 'bretheran-ilizer' before 10pm These people have no "rules" unless they decide to enforce them.

I suggest we mitigate this by keeping the church volunteerism aspect in place and easing up our tax burden (isn't that what we're after? privateers taking care of social issues and not a bigger govt.) and at the same time moving them to a more industrious area in Ballard: Mars Hill compound. They have some serious square footage and a few condo residents/retail in the area that would be impacted.

Mars Hill has to have some sort of shuttle between its I-5 corridor, east side, and Olympia locations that could drop them near many work locations through the Northwest.

And the church funds have to be fairly deep given the young professional crowd doing gods work. Seems win/win to me!

Good idea if they were a real church! ;)

i plan on attending this meeting.

it will be interesting to see where everyone really stands - not just the feel-good PCtalk over dinner, but the true face of the community. not sure if i'm ready for the glimpse...

i'm not for or against this really. i don't exactly "want" a homeless shelter in "my" neighborhood, but they have to exist somewhere, right? well, where?

see you on the 20th....

They may have to exists....but do they ALL have to exist in Ballard?

My issue is the unfair dumping of all the city's bums here. If they're good eneough for Ballard, they should be good enough for Ravenna, Magnolia, View Ridge, etc., etc.

But noooooo....every scumbag in the state must be shoved into little odl Ballard. Why?

Perhaps because we don't actively resist it.

To JottoL......The "majority work" what are the rest doing during the day, shopping at the mall?? Work = $=pay your own way! Here's a concept (not a new one) maybe they could pool their money and RENT an apartment together (of course they may have to submit to a back ground/criminal/credit check, oh dear, probably a deal breaker!) Your entire statement: "as for accountability and responsibility blah blah then most of us" ARE YOU KIDDING? Many of us did meet some of these "folks" at the last meeting and after they spoke they FAR EXCEEDED MY PRE-CONCEPTIONS.

Yes, Mymble even the homeless people who are able to present themselves in a manner that would give a potential employers reason to hire them have trouble landing jobs. The kind of jobs that people with only a GED or less could get 15 or 20 years ago are pretty scarce. As for housing, yes when you are not employed, have been in jail even for non-felony crimes, and have no credit to speak of, getting housing is very difficult. Some of the people in shelters could use some coaching when it comes to getting a job and housing. Come have dinner with the SHARE group sometime. Maybe you will have some positive ideas to contribute.

I'm leaving Ballard!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

All talk and no action. Let's see you actually do it.

Please.

This weekend. But don't worry, I'll definitely come back to Ballard to visit all the places I've grown fond of.

I can't get away from rich-white-guilt-psuedo-liberal nutballs fast enough.

A word of advice - wherever you move, better make sure that there's no church or synagogue in the neighborhood.

I couldn't agree with this more if you paid me.

Talk about hitting the nail on the head.

We are too. But we had planned to before all this happened. It just makes it easier to leave. Much much easier.

Bum B Gone! please do a little homework before you unload your prejudice on the rest of us. The majority of the men who will be sleeping at the Calvary shelter work. Share group membership is quite stable. People generally leave when they have managed to get an apartment. As for accountability and responsibility - these folks have to put up with more of both during their time together than most of us. There will be occassional meals served by the congregation that will be open to Calvary's neighbors. I suggest you come to one of them and get to know some of people you seem to think you know. I think you will find they do not fit your pre-conceptions.

Well said and true.

JottoL, you are an idiot.

Perhaps I am an idiot, Bum B Gone. But it appears that I also know a lot more about the kind of people that participate in SHARE shelters than you do. Calling people whom you do not know derogatory names is irresponsible and childish. I'm sure with a little effort you will be able to participate in the discussion here pro or con without that kind of behavior.

Why not do some research. Go get interviewed by SHARE. But first get drunk or high and tell them you just want a place to hang out and have no interest in finding a job or getting your own place, and see if you get into one of their shelters. Of if that's too demanding a project for you, simply come to one of the open dinners that will be held while SHARE is in the church and get to actually know the people involved.

Baloney! Drunks, druggies and bums.

This is soooo UNBELIEVABLE!! When is OUR REDEEMERS closing? Congregation is few in number, just asking....... and just think, then there would be ANOTHER empty BUILDING/X-CHURCH for SHARE to house the homeless, oh joy... GAG ME! Maybe we should provide a FREE SHUTTLE between the shelters, after all, wouldn't want anyone to get WET!
I suppose OUR REDEEMERS is going to host another tent city in the near future too. Again I say, if OUR REDEEMERS congregation is so HOT to help the homeless, (and all others that take that stance) let the homeless live with them, IN THEIR HOMES, they shouldn't have a problem with this! I hope the meeting, May 20th, is PACKED, and PLEASE let someone that knows how to PASS a microphone do it, not the space cadet that did it at the last meeting, he was worthless! WE NEED SOMEONE WITH SOME LEGAL EXPERTISE HERE....HELP!!

the only people that should have voted on this are those that live next door. Its no surprise that the members voted heavily in favor because they don't live next door to it. What do they care? The members lives are not affected by it at all. I encourage those who live near by to be watchful, keep a camera or preferably a video camera handy and document everything. Familiarize yourself with who the homeless are that are using the shelter. Then when you see the same people urinating on your lawn, smoking crack in your alley, or having sex in your bushes, you have what you need to get the shelter closed.

urinating in lawn, sex in bushes - have you been to fremont or ballard in the last 5 years? this happens on a weekly basis once all the bars close, and those people usu. aren't homeless...

Mike you if you are so concerned with the plight of Ballards homeless, make some space on the floor and have a "Mike shelter". My guess is you are a SHARE shill that lives in Kent, and makes his living from the generosity of others.

that argument makes no sense.

considering this is EXACTLY what SHARE/Calvary are doing, and everyone is pitching a fit. and unlike half the clowns complaining here, i do help the homeless.

volunteering, financial and goods donations and supportin SHARE/TC.

epic fail, troll detector.

and i'm in the interstitial ballard/fremont area, not anywhere near kent, unlike yourself.

you like having your yard pee'd on? you should have more pride in your property.

Kent is really not a bad place. Just saying.

yes it is. just saying.

"considering this is EXACTLY what SHARE/Calvary are doing"

No they're not. Grimm and his congregation live no where near they new bum playground.

You are trying to tell us that the congregation at Our Redeemers do not live in Ballard? You are certainly whacked. Yes they do and off hand I know a dozen. Where do you get your facts...The Onion? Cuz you make no sense and are outright wrong.

Hopefully a few neighbors will set up video cameras to catch the drunks staggering through the neighborhood, some public urination and everything else this lazy merry band of folks will bring to Ballard.

I hope you do too, because these folks don't want to screw up a good thing. They do not want to cause a ruckus and be back on the streets or the bed bug ridden shelters the city runs. These people a clearly trying to transition and have responsibilities to the shelter to have the privileged of a roof over their heads.
Please, yes, let's all set up camera's so we can catch them being the good neighbors they claim to be and if they are not, then let's address that.
I am disappointed by the lack of working with the neighbors and asking residents who want to stay at Calvary to give a background check. I would also feel better if I knew that there are not violent sext offenders or convicted child molesters set into such a family oriented neighborhood.
With that said, let's go ahead and let SHARE prove us wrong. I'd really like that, I really would.

Yes. If I catch someone on film pissing in my yard, Grumm will keep his word right? Thou shall not bare false witness.

If I catch one of these Vagrants pissing on my lawn he is going to catch a beating from my Louisville Slugger.

so any bum pissing on your lawn is proof that the homeless staying @ cavalry are at fault? or just any bum pissing between 7am - 7pm?

I'm seeing some pee-reinactments coming.

Pastor Grumm that is you!!!! You can post using your real name it's Ok really.

7am-7pm is fine.

To recap-SHARE refused to run checks in this community and at this location, yet they run outstanding warrant AND sex offender checks for the Tent City 4 locations on the Eastside and have been since 2004.

The checks are run for free by the King County Sheriff's Office, yet SHARE representatives stood before this community and said they couldn't run them because of the cost involved.

Here is the link to the current permit for SHARE's Tent City 4 that was issued by Redmond. Note: warrant/sex offender checks are included in the permit.

http://www.redmond.gov/cityservices/pdfs/L09006...

SHARE continues to lie and contradict themselves when they claim running checks here would be a "violation" of their rights, yet they run them at their Tent City 4.

I'm no lawyer, but maybe someone who is can answer whether or not SHARE has set a legal precedent by running the warrant/sex offender checks at their Tent City 4?

Maybe they'd welcome you volunteering your time to run the checks. I'm not sure Tent City is a good comparison for the Ballard shelter. And no, there is no "legal precedent." Precedent is set by courts and has to do with rules of law, not the policies of private organizations.

They would not welcome it - it was already offered. Ballard Food Bank offered to partner with them to run the checks (for free).

Clearly, you are unaware that the Ballard Food Bank and many neighbors offered to do the background checks. SHARE said "NO".

Thank you, Mickey and Ballard Mom for pointing this out. These inconsistant statements and claims made by SHARE are what fosters ill will in the community.

The community was only asking for Level 3 sex offender checks. Far less than what is currently being done at SHARE's Tent City 4 on the Eastside, yet SHARE refused. In their refusal they made claims and statements which have now been proven to be false.

It makes one wonder if they have something to hide? Otherwise, why the inconsistancy in running the checks at Tent City 4 yet refusing to run them here?

Require them to volunteer at a public school. You have to have a background check to volunteer at a school/ around kids.

Kidding of course.

Whoever mentioned insurance could be on to something. Most churches are insured under a group policy at the National level so find out which branch of the church is and report it to the National HQ. It is a HUGE liablility issue for the church if something happens.

Sounds like a call to the risk management dept. is in order...

Obviously, SHARE is a dishonest organization hiding behind a religious front.

This is an object fact.

Actually Robin, many neighbors volunteered their time to do the background check and SHARE threw a fit and said it was un-American and an invasion of privacy and wouldn't allow anyone to do it.

i think from a legal standpoint, it would be a huge invasion of privacy for private citizens/neighbors who "volunteered" to do background checks - i'm sure they would also (conveniently) not approve any of the checks, whether or not they background was clean.

Boy, you are indeed a legal scholar...NOT! And to add insult to us for suspecting that a clean background wouldn't be honored?
More shame, more lies, more BS...you clowns have lost it all.

Sounds like SHARE enables and promotes the homeless lifestyle. This is an insult to the people living near this so called vacant church.

They don't need me to run the checks. SHARE residents of Tent City 4 make a call to the King County Sheriff's Office during the intake of a new resident. At the time of check in, a new prospective resident must present a form of i.d. and this information is then given over the cell phone provided by SHARE to the KCSO to run the warrant/sex offender checks.

Shouldn't we be worried about the fact that citizens are homeless? I hear people complaining about unsightly Winnebagos and bums, but no compassion for those who are less fortunate. You'd think the church was handing out keys to the neighborhood houses the way commentators are carrying on about this small shelter. Get a grip, people.

ok, let's examine the tired old verbiage of 'less fortunate'...
Cleft palate?
Muscular dystrophy?
Fetal Alcohol Syndrome?
Crones disease?
Lazy?...ooops, that slipped in there...
Of course, I could go on about 'less fortunate', but
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT LAZY GROWN MEN!!! WTF??

Ever heard of working to pay your own way ?

"Ballard has the opportunity to be an example to the rest of the city, and by extention, the country."

And that's why the people living next to this problem should stand up and just say NO to hobo hotel. There's no accountability or responsibility. Every week a different group of people coming and going.

What good is it? Does it add to the quality of life? Nope!

That is not true. It will NOT be a new group every week. These folks are in *transition* so there will be a few folks who change from week to week, but not, as you stated, a new group every week.

So, what example are they hoping to make of us? That personal responsibility is passe? That accountability is old school? That expecting it is racist? I'm sick of misguided Christians thinking they are doing Gods work with the Devils tongue. Enable grown men to be career bums, host them in a neighborhood that has never been theirs, and demean my good and responsible neighbors in the process. Go to Hell.
You 'holier than thou' nitwits are just as lazy as the bums. What have you done to end homelessness? Anything? Nope, nitwits jeopardizing this community, and no shame...

Exactly, Robin. These are the same people that would likely have no qualms about having a gaggle of predator priests move into a "retreat" in their neighborhood. The man in the nice house next door may be beating his wife. The one across the street with the new car in the driveway may be a raging alcoholic, but as long as it's done behind closed doors by "respectable" people, it's ok. Only when the poor become too visable, forcing us to confront our own hypocracy, does it become a problem.

The neighborhood controversy is hiding behind issues of safety, when the real issue is facing poverty and homelessness head on, in our own back yard. It's uncomfortable to have more than you need when people with nothing are down the block. I spent a decade living among traditional Lakota people--people with the highest poverty rate in the country. But in their society, greed is shameful. Honor is gained by giving...even if all you have is one slice of bread. Even if the person is a stranger. Generosity is a virtue and it is a disgrace to have excess while another has nothing. The complete reverse of our white-bread culture--and this among the poorest of the poor.

Ballard has the opportunity to be an example to the rest of the city, and by extention, the country. To show compassion, respect the dignity of the homeless, and afford basic human rights to those among us who have the least.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/udhr.html

" I spent a decade living among traditional Lakota people"

Blackjack or slots?

you're really trying hard to prove that all conservative dingbats are racist, vagrant. impressive.

I agree Mike, who could ever try to associate Indians tribes with casinos? Crazy!

"Universal Declaration of Human Rights"

Uhh, only the US constitution is valid law in the US. Sorry, but if that angers you, put your anger in a short bumpersticker, add "Now!" at the end, and drive around town.

"the highest poverty rate in the country. But in their society, greed is shameful. "

Well, maybe there's a connection between socialism and poverty?

"The neighborhood controversy is hiding behind issues of safety, when the real issue is facing poverty and homelessness head on, in our own back yard."

That is utter b.s. You really ought to know what you are talking about before you comment. Many people here are actively supportive of the neighborhood food bank, Real Change, and other programs to aid, house and feed the homeless.

The typical NIMBY argument has no cache here. Ballard already has programs supporting the homeless population. But this area is becoming a dumping ground and yet, when neighbors ask questions and request something as simple as a background check, the enablers go all melodramatic.

Oh, and whatever it is the Lakota have to do with a Ballard issue is exceedingly unclear, but it's really neat-o that you know about the Indians. So do I. Someday I'll tell you all about the night I had dinner with John Trudell. Until then, let's stick to the issue, eh?

It's been reported that these homeless folks are not from our backyard. They are bums looking for a free ride. Is that contributing anything to Ballard? What good things do they bring to Ballard?

bum, we've been over this... what are you contributing to ballard? probably not much since you live in... issaquah? your mother's basement? the same questions you apply to the homeless apply to yourself...

Mr. Grumm says that the congregation will have volunteers check upon this site for the first month. Just what will they be doing? Will they go inside and count noses, pray with them, walk around to check on the heat etc? Just what will be their jobs? Also how do these 40 men from Trinity Methodist and now Calvery get to these two places 6 blocks apart. Will they be in a pack train going up from Ballard business district? Ride the 18 bus. Will they have showers located here? If these men are out working or are looking for a job, shouldn't they be clean? Who feeds them breakfast, and dinner? What happens when the weather turns warm. The doors and windows are open. Do they have air condition, or will they be walking around the neighborhood cooling off? Twenty people in a small room can get really hot. Also I thought a public place could not have locked doors at anytime due to fire codes. When getting up in the morning, where will they spend the day? Neighboorhood, Salmon Bay park, Ballard? These are just a few of the questions I would like him to answer. Last question I want answered is why put a shelter in a residential neigborhood, with no services near by?? Does Our Redeemers really need this rental monies from Share so much that they sell out a neighboorhood?

Make room for the old moldy Winnebagos parked in front of your house weeks.

This is bad news for the nearby community. Here comes the bums.

"behavior in the shelter is going to be monitored and any aberrant behavior removes them from the shelter"

Oh, good! Anyone who is intolerable in the shelter is simply ejected into the neighborhood, for their bad behavior to continue within the general public! Smart move, guys!

Do you smell that? it smells like..............A lawsuit.

"Pastor Grumm told us that if a member commits a crime in the neighborhood, the shelter is “out of there,” a promise SHARE made during a heated community meeting in February."..........

O.K.-where should I send the endless documentation (police reports/incident reports) that proves that this statement is FALSE? Who is the lead on this in the neighborhood that will be attending this farce of a community meeting?

Should I start with the police report from Redmond (46+ pages) involving the Tent City 4 resident that was evicted from TC4 and then went across the street to a wooded area next to the Jr. High where he made his home as he went on a crime spree burglarizing neighbors homes and was caught and arrested while in the possession of a knife/22 caliber ammo? SHARE did not move out. TC4 remained.

What about the police report involving a TC4 resident who stole checks from an elderly church woman who hired her to work around her house when her Woodinville church was hosting TC4? The criminal was arrested/convicted and served jail time but remained living in TC4 up to the point she went to jail and returned there immediately upon her release from jail. She in fact lived in Tent City 4 for 2+ yrs and was only kicked out when neighbors researching crime associated with SHARE's Tent City turned her name and evidence over to the police and SHARE then had her move out because their dirty little secret of harboring criminals came to light. By the way- the criminal wrote the stolen checks to her boyfriend who was also a Tent City resident and remained one even when his gal went to jail.
Or how about the "escaped from community custody" criminal that had an outstanding felony warrant and was hiding out in TC4 and arrested only when neighbors uncovering the facts about SHARE turned his name over to the police on Mercer Island?
I could go on and on, but let me tell you that in each and every one of these cases SHARE's words were meaningless. After this was brought to light, they failed to keep their so called "word" and move out.

start w/the news.

The Times was interested in the information when it was presented to them back in September, but with the election they decided to wait until after the first of the year. Unfortunately due to the economic cut backs and reporters being laid off, they said they didn't have anyone available to give it the attention it would need.
The investigative work has been done and there are countless binders of police reports and data to prove that the story being sold by SHARE is simply FALSE.
Getting someone to take this to the masses is a different story. I think part of it is a reluctance on the part of the media to do a real investigative type story on a so called "homeless" organziation (SHARE) for fear of not being PC.

Why would they care to bring the facts to light? So that they could be called racists, homeless-phobics, fear mongers, chicken littles, etc.?
The media is not going to inform anyone of the facts. Every news report that I saw or heard, didn't even mention the issues that SHARE has failed to be truthful about, and simply stated that neighbors were opposed to the shelter. Not a word as to why we are opposed.
I expect that the neighborhood watches should take it from here, and to report all illegal activity. We must be vigilant, and watch out for ourselves. We are truly alone in this.

Juat dronve past Our Reedemer's and there seems to be a news crew filming outside. Looks like a good time to go over and voice your opinion to the public if anyone cares to do so.

I think there is a typo in that the shelter is to be open from 7pm - 7am as opposed to the other way around.

Thanks Ballardmom, you are correct, we fixed the times.

"congregation had overwhelmingly voted in favor"..... Let's keep in mind that a previous report here stated that roughly 36 people voted on May 7th.
Depending on the actual size of their entire congregation, I would hardly call this "overwhelming".

Based on a few churches I've vistited in Seattle, that could also be unanimous agreement of their entire congregation. Many churches in Seattle are quite small. Have you noticed how many church mergers have happened in Ballard alone in the last few years? They are all getting so small that they can't keep their doors open so they merge.

Perhaps, like the newspapers, you've become passe?

I hope that people who still have questions would come to the May 20th meeting at 7PM at the Calvary Lutheran campus and ask those questions.

Questions to ask would be what kind of liability insurance does Our Redeemer carry and what is the name of their insurance company? Is the insurer aware that this vacant building will now be used for this purpose?

How wonderful that Our Redeemer's has opened its arms to Ballard's homeless community. To those who worry about the lack of background checks (something that is not required to buy the house next door to you, by the way), I point you to the comment of Lt. Steve Paulsen with the Seattle Police Department's Southwest Precinct in discussing the shelter in its West Seattle location--he said there have been NO PROBLEMS with the shelter while it has been in West Seattle.
http://www.ballardnewstribune.com/2009/04/22/ne...

Robin, there is a distinction between a background check and checking against the sex offender list. One of the requests of the neighbors was for checks against the sex offender list (not a complete background check).

If someone lives next door to you and is a convicted sex offender - they must register their address - so the public is aware of their address. However, those sex offenders that are homeless (and no, I am not saying all homeless people are sex offenders, etc.) register as "homeless" and thus there is no address.

Well here's what the neighbors in West Seattle had to say. Apparently the SHARE vagrant shelter in West Seattle wasn't all that much fun, complete with prostitution and fights:

http://westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=5908

I have lived in the neighborhood of the West Seattle Church of the Nazarene for twenty years. I am all for helping the homeless if they comply by the rules of the shelter.

My family, my neighbors, and myself have had numerous encounters with the homeless who have stayed in the shelter in the past and they have not all been nice. I had one man threaten to kill me with his Mac10 after swinging a back pack full of glass beer bottles at my neighbors head. The man told us he was here drinking with his buddies who stay in the church basement.

Any time someone has been turned away from the shelter they end up on my property or the property of my neighbors. I had one man completely strip down changing his clothes, he refused to leave my yard. He even urinated in my front yard twice before SPD arrived. I had a spanish speaking homeless man from the shelter use my yard for a toilet with the neighbors watching. It’s no fun to pick up human poop much less dog poop from your yard, especially if you don’t have a dog.

The whole immediate neighborhood has suffered severely in the past with complaints to the church head office. In the past when the church has opened the basement as a shelter the Green Acres apartments had as many as 10 vacant apartments at one time because of encounters with an angry drunk or an under the influence of who knows what wasted homeless person who ends up sitting at the back door of the church.

Many long time home owners who were raised in this neighborhood sold their family homes. One neighbor moved as close as six blocks away just to get away from the crime in the immediate neighborhood of the church. Homeless were caught breaking into his camper and sleeping in it as it was parked in his driveway.

Every time the shelter has opened over the years the neighborhood has witnessed an increase of unreported broken windows in vehicles, car prowls, car thefts, drug dealers on the corners, and numerous nasty prostitutes are working the bus stops.

In the darkness of the night or the light of day many neighbors have witnessed the property of the church being used by prostitutes for numerous years with complaints to the minister who is seldom around to see what is going on, he has a day job that keeps him very busy.

The church has had considerable destruction at the hands of the homeless. Doors have been replaced from being kicked in by the homeless. The last group who stayed completely destroyed the lighting on the back of the church making the parking lot VERY dark next to the field where rapes have occured in the past. I ran off a nasty prostitute who was in the church parking lot offering blow jobs for $20.00 to my neighbors as well as the homeless at 6:00 AM as they were going to work.

We have gone to the expense of installing a surveillance and alarm system to our property due to the numerous attempted break ins. We have worked too hard for what we have and my property is not a shopping center.
Comment by Desi Russell Seefeld

That's funny because the West Seattle blog was filled with neighbors complaining about drunks, prostitutes, public urinating. Lucky for them we now host the vagrant circus

Will pastor Grimm compensate us for lowering our property values?

and how does that pencil out compared to price drop from the bush epic fail! fallout?

Mike -Steve try and stay on topic. We wanted the same courtesy extended to the east side and TC4, and got nothing.

probably because their responding to other calls just the the NP has been avoiding calls in ballard. to get a more accurate picture, one needs to look at the incident log for the area in west seattle. that paints a better picture.

Trix, your answer is nonresponsive and flip. Your landlord did a background check on you to make sure you'd pay your rent and that you wouldn't destroy the place. If the church shouldn't house an overnight shelter, where do you suggest the residents sleep? I can promise you that eliminating the shelter does not keep the residents out of the neighborhood. They're just finding places to sleep outside. Furthermore, being homeless doesn't mean a person is a criminal or a sexual predator. In fact, violent crimes are more often committed by people who are housed. If you're interested in educating yourself instead of running around like Chicken Little, check out http://www.nhchc.org/.

Robin, I find your attitude to be flip, frankly. And further more, we aren't sheltering 'Ballard's homeless', that is a lie, again. You all are importing homeless into Ballard. Huge difference. But, that's a fact, and facts don't fit into your head, do they?

Give me a break. I had a criminal background check done on me before I could tutor children living in a shelter and, I can assure you, I believe that policy is the correct one. So, what is SHARE grumbling about? Preconceived notions that some of the men slated to live in the church might have criminal records? Please explain to me the harm in doing the background checks.

Putting a shelter into an EMPTY, NON-ACTIVE church -- a building all the Loyal Heights neighbors have an interest in -- is not a decision for a mere 36 people to make.

Your compassion is commendable. But bleeding hearts are only one part of this equation with the shelter. The safety, security and various other interests and needs of the neighborhood have been summarily dismissed by the SHARE crowd.

SHARE and the pastor are playing with fire here.

You may not have to submit to a background check to buy the house next door, but if you are a convicted sex offender, you do have to register your address, so at least your neighbors can be informed should they choose. That's the difference.

This isn't an eithe - or issue .... You can have compassion for, donate to, and volunteer with homeless people/ homeless organizations and still feel like background checks are a wise choice. And you can simultaneously advocate for the rights of the neighbors and neighborhood. I agree that most homeless people aren't a threat. But that isn't the point. The point is that families nearby are having their neighborhood impacted and their legitimate concerns aren't being addressed. It'd be the same if they wanted to put a park and ride next door. It'll impact the area. Period.

If SHARE does background checks at other shelters, what is the problem? I am put off at their unwillingness to compromise. I don't live in the immediate vicinity (and no, not on the Eastside) but have been following the issue. I'd check into the zoning that the churh and that area has. Can they sleep people there? It may impact their non profit status as a church if it doesn't align w/ their mission. I'd also sue them. I am not litigous by nature but sometimes only such drastic steps will ellicit a reaction. Surely there is a Ballard practitioner who can file on behalf of the neighbors?

Good luck neighbors. I almost wish for some petty crime to happen b/c "Pastor Grumm told us that if a member commits a crime in the neighborhood, the shelter is “out of there,” " Something small enough to cause their eviction...

The 'man of the cloth' says many things...... it remains to be seen if he will be a 'man of his word'. I have my doubts.

Wow. When have I ever said anything against the homeless? I just believe there are all types of homeless (like you get in any group of people), and the neighbors have a right to have their voices heard too.
If SHARE knew at all how to introduce a shelter into a neighborhood there would be no issue. All the neighbors want is to be listened to and their fears respected without being accused of being anti-homeless.
And as a long time reader of Real Change and a financial contributor of the Seattle Union Gospel Mission, I think I'm pretty clear on the subject of homelessness.

Maybe not to buy a house. I wouldn't know about that. But they sure as heck did a thorough background check to rent me the apartment I'm in.

This article appears in the Real Change newspaper and was written by the Pastor of Trinity United Methodist on March 11, 2009. Trinity also has been involved in hosting SHARE shelters. I believe it is a must read in light of the current situation regarding SHARE:

SHARE-ing the Mission

If you want to see human primate behavior at its worst I can think of no better place than at another in the never ending series of neighborhood explosions as soon as SHARE opens a shelter in yet another host church.
The SHARE neighborhood gatherings almost always descend into an outbreak of hysteria fueled by fear that the homeless will plunder our houses, burn down our garage, steal our children, abuse our spouses, and pee in our bushes. In Seattle one also witnesses the agonizing descent of progressive, eco-friendly, really nice neighbors morphing into belligerent, bullying, arrogant, selfish, "not in my backyard" hypocrites who haven't a clue as to how shallow their character truly has become.

But my beef isn't with them. Those nice neighbors, nice mostly because they are relatively secure, are trapped like slaves in Pharaoh's empire by a political process that caters to the appetites of the massively wealthy who care little at all about the common good. It is a great sadness that the middle class identifies with the agenda of the obscene rather than focusing on housing for all, living wages, and limits to wealth. It was the wealthy who destroyed low income housing in this City, and it is the wealthy who set the political agenda that creates homelessness.

But my beef isn't with the wealthy. After all they are only being true to their nature as exploiters. They only care about profit, their own benefits. My beef is actually with SHARE, an organization that evidently has only one tool in its box, and is seemingly incapable of adapting and evolving with the changing of time, and circumstance.

For example, SHARE's routine is this: locate a host for shelter space, inform the neighborhood that it is moving in next week, call together a community gathering for neighbors to vent, march up a hapless, ill-trained motley crew of homeless targets that sit passively through a two-three hour mauling of whatever dignity they might have left, and then move the shelter in as the neighborhood temper tantrum dies down into resignation.

It works for SHARE but it damages the host and it brings an unnecessary provocation within the neighborhood. It seems to me it might be more fruitful for SHARE to first bring an education forum into the neighborhood, complete with a political organizing strategy to help the neighbors direct their anger at the place it belongs: the Mayor's office and City Council. But this would mean that SHARE, with limited resources, might have to first learn how to become an equal partner with other homeless advocates. They might have to learn to depend on allies to help them. That would mean that SHARE might have to grow up out of adolescence into adulthood as a movement of real change. It would mean that SHARE might have to, well, share the mission with others.

Rev. Rich Lang is Pastor of Trinity United Methodist in Ballard, and a member of the Real Change Organizing Project. He can be contacted through www.tumseattle.org

As usual, I agree with Rev. Lang (for the most part, anyway). His article is one of the many reasons I buy Real Change. The anger of the neighbors and the somewhat good intentions of SHARE need to be aimed at the mayor's office. And SHARE needs to grow up and realize the benefit of compromise.

Sigh........
'20 pre-screened men.' So, who is screening them and what, exactly, ARE they being screened for? I'm all for sheltering those in need but why are neighbor concerns always put down as 'anti-homeless' and thus ignored?
There were legitimate concerns here and a chance to make everyone happy.

I'm very sad, very disappointed in this decision, but not the least bit surprised. We have now lost the fight for accountable responsible behavior in this issue.
Cash the check Mr. Grimm, Judas, you have betrayed your brothers.

it's not lost, just a setback. one does not give up the fight because of this.

Thank you for your words of encouragement....please repeat them often...
I will continue to fight. And, I'm ready to contribute handsomely to anyone that can stop this farce from occurring.

and now watch the NIMBY liars start their racist/elitist spin in 3..2..1..

Mike, so you camped out on this story for the moment it was posted.
Just so that you could hurl your puke on my neighbors?
I don't understand the motive, or the anticipated result.
But over 300 comments later....you can see it.

Racist? bums are a race now? The looney left at its best.

Time to lawyer up!

i guess you're writing this from your backyard in bellevue.....

Let the clock start on when the first property crime happens 1...2...3...

I mean Sex Crime.