Our Redeemers: ‘More than deeply saddened’

Over the weekend, a Level III sex offender was removed from the SHARE homeless shelter at Calvary Lutheran church. Pastor Steve Grumm of Our Redeemer’s Lutheran Church, which oversees the Calvary property, told us today that he is “more than deeply saddened by this.”

“It’s not only a surprise, but an alarm,” he said. Grumm said he’s held several conversations since the weekend with SHARE about the organization’s screening process, which does not include sex offender background checks. “They seem open to additional accountability,” Grumm said, adding that the task force set up to monitor the shelter plans to meet with SHARE later this week. Neighborhood representatives of the task force are demanding that sex offender checks “be immediately implemented,” but a SHARE representative told us on Monday that the sex offender incident “doesn’t change anything.”

“We had something going,” Pastor Grumm says about how well the Calvary Lutheran shelter was running before this weekend. “Neighbors were even bringing residents food.” Grumm said he plans to meet with neighbors next week after he’s spoken more in-depth with SHARE.

109 comments on “Our Redeemers: ‘More than deeply saddened’”

  1. what a great christian attitude on display here church. your god and savior would be proud. remind me who was it your jesus hung out with?

    To all the chicken little's out there i understand your concern. However, outside of stigmatizing and locking people up for life even after they've paid their debt to society, your sentiment really is that you don't want them near you. The “I don't really care where they go but they can't stay here” approach is going to fix the problem huh? I know what, why don't we just put them all on an island together. Better yet why don't we just put you on an island where you will be safe, isolated and never at risk of anything bad happening. I wish we could.

    Like it or not homeless people are still people. Contrary to what you may believe, even sex offenders are still people. As such, while they deserve very little in my opinion, the do deserve the opportunity to receive treatment, try to rebuild their lives, better themselves and try to move on after paying their debt to society. Assuming they remain in compliance with the orders of their release, whether this takes place in a homeless shelter, halfway house, apartment or condo is up to them and their parole officer, not you. Whether this is agreeable to you or not is irrelevant. This is fact, this is what they deserve and are guaranteed in this country as a human being. Who are you to deny them this simply because they try to carry it out in the vicinity of your home? But then again, here's to you and your utopian little island.

    Thank you to vdog, bellie and the others who were sensible enough to do some research rather than immediately picking up their pitchfork and torch.

  2. …and what if one had a drug problem, and what if one sold drugs, and what if one drove drunk once, and what if one doesn't call their mom on her birthday??

    Who said this guy was unregistered? Because you do realize he was, right? That's where the classification comes in and they are all required to register upon their release. Who said he was unsupervised? Because as part of their release they are on SUPERVISED parole/probation.

    It is amazing how scary the world can be when you add the words “what if” huh? Don't let your imagination get the best of you Teddie.

    That being said, I do sincerely empathize with your wife's situation. It is great she's been able to move on and she is most certainly entitled to her opinion on the matter.

  3. SHARE is setting itself up for a huge lawsuit and deservedly so what with their caviler attitude about level 3 sex offenders.

  4. well, be that as it may, SHARE said it wouldn't and doesn't house sex offenders – or level three at least – but lo and behold they were housing one.

    again, only the awareness of a citizen brought this to light, SHARE only reacted after it was public. maybe they knew? maybe not….who knows.

    fact is, they broke their word to the neighborhood.

  5. As I understand it (and I may be wrong here, I'm going off of other people's posts…) it is illegal for a level 3 sex offender to reside within X distance of schools and/or daycares. So, while I agree that it is the appropriately Christian thing to do to give a another chance, part of that next chance means _not_ living within X distance of schools and/or daycares. That is, _don't_ violate your parole (thereby breaking the law- again). I would also wonder if, by allowing a shelter within X distance of schools and/or daycares without screening for level 3 sex offenders the church and/or SHARE could be abetting parole violation. Again, I don't know- I've never had a reason to look up this information.
    I think many people are also upset about being lied to by a preacher (pastor, priest, whatever- I don't really know the difference…) and being lied to by SHARE (although I get the feeling everyone kind of expected the latter…).

  6. What I don't get is why not help the ones that have no criminal records or drug problems first?

    If there is one place in a shelter and you have some person that has worked hard all their life, never been in trouble, and lost their job/home, and you have another who is a drug addict rapist that has been in prison before and caused nothing but misery to the people around him, who should we give the place to?

    To me the answer seems pretty obvious.

    Why not help the people that have been 'good' and are in exactly the same situation as the people that have been 'bad'? I just don't get all this compassion towards Level 3 sex offenders.

    Have a shelter with conditions that need to be followed and I doubt anyone would have a problem.

    Keep Ballard a nice place, don't invite rotten apples into our basket to spoil the good fruit here. People don't all have the right to live wherever they like.

  7. A quick check of the King County sex offender registry shows 462 individuals listed as “HOMELESS.”

    Like it or not, these are the facts and as citizens and tax paying members of this community we absolutely have a duty not to ignore this.

    SHARE's vehement refusal to run the checks here in Ballard when they are running them for their Tent City 4 begs the question-WHY?

    They claim in their “statement/letter” for this article that it is “un-American” yet they have been running them for Tent City 4 since 2004?

    Smoke and mirrors. One can reasonably conclude that their steadfast refusal to run the checks here is Ballard means they have something to hide.

    It was only because of an alert “My Ballard” forum post by “shanedillon” that we even know that there was a Level 3 sex offender/child rapist there. That post is what led to the sex offender being asked to leave, not SHARE “discovering” it. It was only discovered after it was made public in this forum.

    These checks need to be ran immediately, or this shelter needs to be evicted. Plain and simple.

  8. A sex offender didn't just “sneak in”. This child rapist had been in jail YET AGAIN (original crime was committed in 2005) and 4 days after being released from jail checked into this shelter.
    SHARE has their resident sex offenders register as “homeless” so that way there is no address and they can plead ignorance since they don't run the checks at this location. For whatever reason, this sex offender/child rapist actually provided the address of where he was staying.
    SHARE got caught doing what they do best, which is lying. They refused to run sex offender checks at this location, even though they run them at other SHARE locations. Why would they refuse to run them unless they knew they had sex offenders there?

Login or register (optional)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *