Neighbors hear homeless shelter plans

About 80 neighbors gathered at Calvary Lutheran Church in Loyal Heights Wednesday night for a community meeting about the SHARE homeless shelter that’s moving into the building on May 30th. Our Redeemers Pastor Steve Grumm and a half-dozen SHARE members, with the help of a moderator, explained the shelter’s ground rules and fielded a wide range of questions.

Pastor Grumm said that the church will check in with the shelter members every night, and a task force will be created with neighbors to address any new concerns that arise. SHARE members briefed neighbors on their rules — no alcohol, drugs or loitering in the area — and they plan to provide safety patrols for a two block radius around the church every hour from 7 to 10 p.m.

“I’m really glad you’re going to be in our neighborhood,” said Sharon, who lives nearby. “We welcome you.” While many neighbors agreed, others felt Our Redeemers and SHARE didn’t go far enough to ensure a safe environment. “I feel the concerns we brought up fell on deaf ears,” said Ivan, who was a member of the neighborhood task force that worked with the church and SHARE. He focused most of his frustration at SHARE, which has refused to submit to “un-American” background checks, one of the key requests from neighbors. “We’re dealing with an organization that hasn’t shown one ounce of willingness to negotiate,” Ivan said. SHARE, meanwhile, defended their screening process and system of accountability. “We manage ourselves,” said Benjamin. “If someone goes off into someone’s yard, we call the cops. We’re responsible for what goes on.” Other neighbors asked for better communication, namely a 24-hour phone number they could call if problems arise.

The surprise guest of the night was Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis who stood up to answer a question about the legality of hosting a homeless shelter at the vacant church. “We don’t require permits for churches when they want to minister to the homeless,” he said, explaining the homeless problem is greater than the city can solve on its own. “The mayor asked for churches to open their doors to help.” The SHARE shelter is moving in on May 30th.


87
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
pieceofmind
Guest
pieceofmind

http://tinyurl.com/ofnlkh (Link to tonight's Fox news story, for what it's worth)

Nice article. However, SHARE did not do its fair share of actually ANSWERING any questions tonight. I am highly disappointed in how our neighborhood has been treated during this entire ordeal. Phone numbers and sex offender checks? Wow, sounds like a pretty Christian thing to do to me. I can say this one thing: Our Redeemers membership should come to even more of a grinding halt. There's a reason church membership in Seattle is virtually nonexistent in Seattle and it's due to church “leadership” like that of Our Redeemers. Soon enough, they'll have an empty church for their own shelter. The homeless men at the meeting tonight were the only redeeming part of this meeting. They were eloquent, honest, and were the only reason I could stomach being there. Despite SHARE's piss-poor leadership, these men deserve a shelter. Too bad the process was so awful.

Activist
Guest
Activist

This is absolutely a positive for our community. Would you rather have the homeless sleep in bushes around the neighborhood or have them in a safe place? Sex offenders are required to report their address, so would you rather them have an address our be homeless?

Of these 20 men, SHARE will hold them accountable and give them services to pick themselves up from their bootstraps and become productive members of society.

Activist
Guest
Activist

Fox news I cringed, but its only Q13. There are shower facilities available downtown, its called the Urban Rest Stop and residents are going to be bussed downtown daily. SHARE hasn't been very successful with wooing the neighborhood, but at least they are doing something.

Hey
Guest
Hey

I live close by to the shelter…and at first was hesitant. More I think about it though, I think its a good move. The homeless issue is a pretty big one in Seattle, and one that I think alot of people actually care about. I believe people are sympathetic, but just don't want a shelter in their neighborhood. That's understandable….but shelters will have to be put up somewhere. At the end of the day, somebody will have to be living close to a shelter. Why not here? I have no problem with it.

Activist
Guest
Activist

You're a breath of fresh air. Everyone on this blog (probably only a few posting under numerous names) are completely out of touch. The fanatical, NIMBY have taken over. Don't want homeless in the park, don't want them on the street, don't want them in motor homes, and sure as hell don't want them under a roof. Everyone has the right to move freely around the city, so whats the problem with them getting services (which their tax dollars don't pay for). Last time I checked there weren't any covenants included in any title reports for anyone in ballard. Move to a neighborhood that includes those covenants, then bitch on some blog about all the hoa fees you need to pay.

mickey
Guest
mickey

“Sex offenders are required to report their address, so would you rather them have an address our be homeless?”

Under the SHARE plan, neighbors have no way of knowing which shelter residents may be sex offenders or not. The way you phrased your argument makes no sense.

And, as evidenced by their offensive accusations that neighbors needs are “un-American”, SHARE's definition of what constitutes accountability does not match this community's defintion.

mickey
Guest
mickey

Gee, you're full of generalizations and assumptions.

And for the record, I post under my real name.

Why don't you try posting under yours, before making assumptions about who people on the blog really are, and what they believe?

Activist
Guest
Activist

Sex offenders are required to report their address. They can rent an apartment just as easily as moving into a shelter without reporting. It's all on them, it's their responsibility and thats how the law works. Imagine if you were a landlord and didn't run a full check, like a lot of them don't, because its not their responsibility.

Personally I would rather have sex offenders be housed, have a address to report, and have some sort of path to reentry into society. If the state isn't going to house them, someone should, cause I sure as hell don't want them crawling around my bushes.

mickey
Guest
mickey

Yes, EXACTLY. But the men moving into the church shelter are an unknown quantity and SHARE is refusing to do the checks. Therefore, while I know the identity and criminal record of the guy living at 73rd and 15th, I know NOTHING about any of the people moving into the shelter and have no way of knowing because of the SHARE policy.

Activist
Guest
Activist

I think that you completely missed my point. Anyone can buy a house, and most landlords will rent one to anybody. SHARE isn't running checks just like most landlords aren't in this economy.

It's the sex offender's responsibility to report their address, and it's way better for them to have an address to report than to be homeless.

How do you know the record of the guy on 73td and 15th?

Free Ballard 4 Real
Guest
Free Ballard 4 Real

Once tonights koolaid wears off, you will come to your senses. Your under a spell right now. We forgive you.

JM98107
Member
JM98107

In my opinion, Churches have very little credibility. It's a mistake to let this shelter open in a residential neighborhood.

Frantic Freddie
Guest
Frantic Freddie

Yes, like Leo Rhodes, SHARE member, leader and homeless for 20 years. Apparently still looking for his bootstraps.

Scott
Guest
Scott

OK OK so we're going to have these folks now “living” amongst us. Are there demnds put on these people like the rest of us too? Or is this yet another hammock? Also, this is a huge test. All those for this should be held accountable and those against it should be the ones checking. I want front page attention when one “slips up”. I want progress reports on the acheivements. I want accountability. Too bad this is and had been a GD political football. We're all going to be paying more for everything here now, so one real question is would we rather have government (they don't care or give a rats ass) do this with yet another failed program, or have a church do it? Seperation of church/state? This IS a test. Do NOT attempt to adjust YOUR set people. Isn't being “progressive” wonderfull!!!!!!!!

JM98107
Member
JM98107

I don't think this program could be labeled progressive. It's a leftover Republican policy.

Mymble
Guest
Mymble

Separation of church and State….that's a joke, and used when it's 'convenient' to accomplish ones goals in either direction. In this case 'separation' = no need to follow the law(s), because the church is 'separate' (use of their building to accomplish their 'mission')

Did you know: that the Northminster Presbyterian church, corner of NW 77 th St and 25th AVE NW hosts 'overflow' men from the mentally ill program every Thurs and Fri night (total 7 men) Live in the neighborhood, haven't had any problems.

Just wondering:
Is Our Redeemers planning on hosting tent city this year?
What compensation/$ does Our Redeemers receive from the City of Seattle for hosting?

TTTCOTTH
Guest
TTTCOTTH

I remember the good old days of Bill Clinton when AIDS and Homelessness didn't exist and when it was AOK to blow your load on employees. Those were the days!

Sunset Hill res
Guest
Sunset Hill res

'SHARE isn't running checks just like most landlords aren't in this economy.'

Are you on drugs ? Most landlords want to collect rent not provide shelter to a loser so they do run credit and background checks in this economic environment. If someone hasn't paid their rent in the last place they probably aren't going to pay in the new one, the landlord definitely wants to know that before they have some loser cruiser move in.

BallardAbroad
Guest
BallardAbroad

As a Ballard neighbor spending a year abroad, I want to suggest that many other countries have far better and more neighborhood-friendly ways to treat people in need than setting up homeless shelters like this. I hope you will all consider some more significant solutions that address the many and complex root causes of this problem, instead of merely arguing about whether or not homeless camps are to be allowed in our neighborhood. This is what we get for our furiously anti-social and antagonistic individualist attitude about other people who share our country. Reading about the homeless issues in the US and in Ballard in particular is baffling, shocking, and really, it seems incomprehensible. Why should the homeless problem even exist in America? The US is one of the wealthiest nations on earth and yet we let so many people be homeless, what is there to be proud of in that?

JM98107
Member
JM98107

Isn't it up to each individual to take care of him or her selves? The government can only do so much.

JM98107
Member
JM98107

We don't see what that has to do with creating the Bush recession.

BallardAbroad
Guest
BallardAbroad

It's not so either/or this question of government vs individuals. individuals in America collectively make the government what it is and what it isn't. The government can do some of what we empower it to do. Look at the Military over the span of the last 70 years or so; we've had absolutely the most capable, first rate military force on the planet — not that they're perfect. But big? you betcha! and excellent? most would argue they're the finest. So for me it doesn't hold water to say we can't expect our government to do a decent job of housing people who are unable to work it out to have a home. Nothing cush or better than what anyone working a decent job could afford, mind you, but something decent and safe. With all we're putting into homeland security, we could do better on homeless security.

Guest
Guest
Guest

We were there last night, and were surprised by the contentious-bordering-on-hostile attitude coming from Our Redeemer's. We're kind of new to this issue, but if this is what the neighborhood has had to deal with we can understand the frustration. They seem to think that they are accountable to no-one, and essentially, we feel that the city has given them more traction in that regard. Our question is this, if they are receiving remuneration from the city, isn't the city ultimately responsible for this?

Watergirl
Guest
Watergirl

It's my understanding that Share offers no services at all other than a shelter for the night. There are many other programs out there that serve the homeless, offering shelter, meals, counseling, support in finding work, and help finding permanent housing. I'd rather see OR use Calvary to actually HELP people.

As for bringing in the guys currently sleeping in the bushes … Share says over and over they don't do that.

No_More_cash_4_u_EVER
Guest
No_More_cash_4_u_EVER

Activist – Yes I am a “NIMBY” You know why? Because it's MY BACKYARD!! I have a stake in this neighborhood you don't. Bye Bye Go away now.