This week we've discussed some of the practical and political issues surrounding the proposed PADS shelter at St. Mary's Episcopal Church.
We certainly hope we have added useful information to the discussion. The entire PRU Crew felt very strongly that it was necessary to try to remove some of the rosy glow coloring the glasses of those supporting the invitation of an increased homeless population into Park Ridge.
We believe such an invitation should be undertaken with eyes wide open.
We had intended today to discuss at length the potential issues of vagrancy, loitering, squatting in vacant buildings, and future demands on services and city staff.
But we have decided to leave those discussions entirely up to you.
Feel free to add your thoughts, knowledge, and opinions to the issue.
Have a great weekend, and don't suffer one pang of guilt for having achieved the living you've earned as a Park Ridgian. And no, you do not have to give anything away to somebody else's preferred choice of charity.
April 4, 2008
With Eyes Wide Open.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
66 comments:
In support of the PADS initiative and NO GUILT HERE for feeling that way. Compassion is how I would describe it. Have a nice week-end yourself!
I beleive that good debate on any issue is healthy. I also believe that when entering such debate, particularly one which sparks such emotion, one should rely on facts and not assumption.
With that said, it would seem that proponints for the pads program are running on "facts" that have been offered by the church, whose facts were offered by PADS. I believe in trust and good faith as much as the next guy but I sure wouldn't base an argument on hearsay. Remember too, that this hearsay wasn't even offered til well after the decision was already made for you. And all of the pros in regards to this program were offered by the very people who run the program.
Speaking of the people runnng the program, where have they been through all of this? I would think that on such an impotant and emotional issue, they would be right out in front of this taking the lead position. But that isn't the case is it? Hmmm. I wonder why?
It couldn't be possible that such a worthy program is using or exploiting The Minisry or any of it's followers to hide their social agends behind could it? It does seem that once the Ministerial Asscociation agreed to take on this program, the PADS program people just sort of disappeared. Curios! Perhaps they feel they themselves, are unable to sell the program on their own. That would subject them to very serios and personal questions would may shed some real light on the personal gains for what is being sold as a charitable cause.
For those out there who I believe that in your hearts truely believe in this cause, I'm sorry, The Journeys from Pads to Hope are using you. And Althugh you may be ready and willing to take on the fight on their behalf, I say shame on them. This unforunatly is a matter in which opinions differ in great ways, and it had divided a community.
So thank you Journeys from pads to Hope. For an organization who claims to have compassion for all at heart, your sneaky and suspicios way of doing business says otherwise.
Assumptions you have made AGAIN anon 9:43 am. Journeys from PADS to HOPE did not come to Park Ridge to promote a shelter - that is not how they work. They were asked to come to a HUMAN Needs Task Force by the committee and after that they were asked to come talk to the Ministeal Association. Then continued discussions occurred without Journeys. The Minesterial Association, working with the Village, decided to open a shelter and then asked Journeys if they would partner with them. Journeys only assists shlter ministries by offering administrative help, background checks policies and procedures, and training volunteers. They only come where they are asked to come to address an existing issue. Please place your energy where it needs to be - finding the facts out. Journeys is not involved with the controversy because a) they are probably not aware that it is going on and b) it is not their issue - it is ours: PR residents, village officials and the Ministerial Association. I am sure once meetings are scheduled the Village or the Ministerial Association will invite them to the table. I would hope that even those concerned or against this PADS initiative would not slam the organization that is trying to assure that the shelter operate with structure and support. You know, the church could do shelter without the backing of Journeys and then - how would background checks be done...where would be the linkage agreements with the police department, where would be the interventive services, how would we be able to attend to loitering? If shelter is coming to PR...then wouldn't it be wise to work with the agency willing to step in and help our Ministerial Association instead of slamming them and then they decide not to partner? Where would we be then?
Anon@10:37,
Would you please describe in educated detail--
1. What exactly is entialed in the two hour training session for PADS volunteers?
2. The extent of the background checks performed and whether or not those background checks are performed before a guest is allowed into a PADS shelter?
3. What policies and procedures you are talking about?
4. What the PADS staff does with people who violate shelter rules?
Say Hello to the folks at Pads I beleive they have logged on to the site. Anon.10:37
We are very well aware that they are here and were here yesterday too.
It's a public blog; everybody is welcome.
Well, if they are "listening", I encourage them to attend the next City Council meeting as well. It will give them a chance to address some of the residents' concerns up front. If in fact there is misinformation being spread about town, this is the time to set things straight, not weeks from now when the community has been irretrievably ripped apart over this issue.
Did anybody read about the fire this week in that house under construction? In the story they said there wasn't any activity in the house over the winter. I thought of that today when I read this here and saw the mention of the vacancy thing. Vacant building do get some people who could get in and camp out. It's sad. I do think that we should maybe expect some incidences of that with more of the homeless people coming.
Nan Parsons indicated that she had spoken to Beth Nabors on the phone at the human tasks needs commission where Pads Journey to Hope was a guest speaker. Did Nan Parsons invite them to come to our town?
Let me address some issues brought up over the last few days of blogging. I just discovered this blog today.
My name is Todd Stull. I am the HOPE Center Director at Journeys from PADS to HOPE. I hope that those people here with concerns engage in a dialog with us regarding issues of homelessness.
First, if you want educated details about Journeys policies, I invite you to communicate with staff at Journeys. You can find phone numbers and emails on our web site at www.padstohope.org. I don't anticipate posting detailed explanations of our policies on this blog.
Second, in a previous posting you suggested our help transitioning 39 clients in one year was not enough to show we were effective. Let me correct some of your numbers. These 39 clients were only those we could verify were in a transitional or permanent housing situation. I feel confident in saying this is an underestimate of the numbers. Next, as we are not the only agency that serves individuals that are homeless in the northwest suburbs, we do not actually see 1,600 unduplicated individuals that are homeless. We might see closer to 400-500 individuals that are homeless each year. We also see hundreds of clients each year that we help prevent from ever becoming homeless. However, I would say it is more accurate that closer to 10% of our clients we can verify we helped out of homelessness, and it wouldn't surprise me that if we had the capability to track clients further, the actual number is close rto a quarter. Using your analogy, that's a lot better than any sort of investment I'm aware of.
Third, we are well aware that addressing the issues leading to homelessness require interventions at multiple levels of care. There are individual, social, and systemic issues contributing to homelessness. While you seem focused on talking about the shelters, you seem to have ignored the support services that the HOPE Center provides year round to clients, and the partnerships we have with agencies that provide transitional or permanent supportive housing for clients. Are you unaware of these services? If so I would be happy to educate those interested about them. There is no panacea for "fixing" homelessness, and there are some clients we find we have difficulty helping. But my staff and co-workers are highly trained professionals who have invested a great deal of education, energy, and time into understanding this issue, and coming up with interventions.
Frankly, research and evidence exists on how to end homelessness, or at the very least, mitigate it greatly. The main problem is that enough resources have not been allocated to addressing it because of different opinions on what are political priorities are. I am not here to criticize that; I do suggest that there has been some gross mischaracterizations of the work Journeys does on this blog.
Finally, safety is one of our number one concerns, for every stakeholder in the community. We have a number of processes in place to address inappropriate behaviors, so that the shelter aspect of Journeys programs is much more than just a flophouse. Indeed we offer a wide variety of counseling and case management services, plus concrete services like food and clothing. I guess one question I have for you is if not for programs like Journeys, what is your alternative plan for addressing homelessness?
Thanks for your input, but no one, and I mean NO ONE, has shown that there is a homeless problem IN PARK RIDGE. As such, the residents are rightly concerned that you are going to bring a problem into the community that does not presently exist.
There you have it. Confirmed Pads watchers. If you don't think they are tuned in on every word that's being said, think again. Perhaps we would benifit by not sharing so much info as they are surely taking notes and devising ways to combat our efforts. They haven't made it into other communities by being stupid.
While we find Mr. Stull's answers to be far far less than direct and honest and even manipulative, we will never condone in any way shape or form the withholding of information from the public discussion of issues. That, by necessity, includes the open exchange of opinions and questions and knowledge from the public.
And if that means the PADS watchers are tuned into every word and going to "devise ways to combat" the opposition, then so be it.
If a majority sentiment expressed by the public in favor of a PADS shelter is the result of the persuasive efforts of the PADS "professionals", then that is fine.
But we hope the public, before allowing themselves to be swayed one way or another on this issue or any other, will demand real and detailed answers from the "professionals", such as Mr. Stull.
Again, we would ask that the questions we have posed be answered in detail, in public; here or at the City Council meeting on Monday evening; and we would point out to Mr. Stull, that your energy spent on your lengthy comment could just as easily have been spent providing substantive answers to the questions that have been posed.
We strongly feel that such matters as your two hour mandatory training session for volunteers is not a subject of national security, but is very much part and parcel of the security of this community and those who live here. Why the secrecy?
Hey Todd,
This all may have worked out a lot better if you all had been more upfront with the community and the neighbors to the church... a loooooong time ago.
As it is we feel this has been foisted upon us. Nobody like that. And that's whether your neighbor is putting up a new fence, doing a major remodel job or INSTALLING A HOMELESS SHELTER IN HIS BASEMENT.
So we aren't so happy with your plans at St. Mary's. NOW you ask us what OUR alternative plans are? Really, the question you should be asking is, what are YOUR alternative plans?
I think these people are liberal do gooders that get off on making themselves feel needed and don't care if they are doing a real job or not of fixing a problem and always want to spend other peoples money on their pet causes.
So I got an idea. Don't look at the people sleeping on the streets as homeless, just think of them as urban campers. There. Feel better? Liberal do gooder problem solved.
Mr. Stull,
First, I appreciate your attempting to contribute constructive dialogue here. Our neighborhood has be taken by surprise by this proposal, and answers are very hard to come by. You can imagine that some folks are feeling disenfranchised and threatened. Many of us who live in close proximity to St. Mary's are parents with young children. We have concerns, and we feel that those concerns are being ignored, particularly in the way this process has been carried out so far. I'm not even sure who is responsible for this process!
I have two requests of you:
1. Please attend, or send a representative to attend, the Monday meeting. We do need real answers.
2. Please describe, if you can, what the rules or policies or guidelines are regarding the location of facilities that wish to act as host buildings for a PADS program. My understanding is that PADS cannot locate in a facility that also contains a school, and this leads to some questions about safety for children, I think. St. Mary's is deeply ensconced in a residential area, an area full of children and on the path to school for many. Does PADS stipulate or prefer or recommend a more commercial zone for the shelter, as would seem to many of my neighbors to make better sense?
Thank you for sticking around to read more comments, as this has gotten very heated. I hope you can understand how a community might lash out after feeling backed into a corner.
Urban campers? Now that's funny.
For what it is worth, I noticed that PADS has a Community Relations Specialist/HOPE Center Receptionist!!! Maybe she can do a little public relating in Park Ridge.
Hey Todd,
Why don't you process fingerprints on these individuals before excepting who they say they are and issuing them a pads shelter card?
In Park Ridge, If you are a parent and want to help the school district with Lunch Program, Science Olympiads, etc.. You must first go to the Police Station and have your fingerprints checked each and every time.
As a volunteer teaching Catechism, DCFS runs a complete background check on me every year.
We love our children and are very concerned with what they will come in contact with. I was at the Human Needs task force meeting and I was not convinced that Pads Journey to Hope does anything more than run a persons name through the internet to see if they have a record.
What about the "Temporary Pass" period that allows these individuals access to the shelters before they have had an investigation? Just one child being injured physically or emtionally is not worth inviting these individuals into our community.
I will be asking my Alderman to vote NO!
Why is the PRMA making this a black & white issue - as if St. Mary's is the only place for PADS, and if they can't jam it in there, our community will never be able to help someone who needs a place to rest? It seems to be - my way, or no way. Why not broaden our problem solving options, there must be some creative minds in this town! Would it be so hard to find an approach that we can all be happy with?
There is an alternative approach: continue to utilize the existing social service agencies in town, such as Center of Concern. Since there is no evidence of a homeless problem in Park Ridge, those agencies are apparently doing their job. Those who are clamoring for a homeless shelter should instead be offering to volunteer and financially support the existing agencies.
To Mr. Sull,
You are touting the Journeys program that maybe is helpful according to you. The PADS program is a different program from your Journeys. They are two programs merged together under one corporation name.
The Journeys office in Palatine that your organization sued the city of Palatine to get is not the same program that will be getting operated at our local church.
Anonymous at #12 - Thank you for recognizing that, indeed, we at Journeys are not stupid.
ParkRidgeUnderground at #13 - I will thank you not to question my "professionalism" again. You can have an honest disagreement without resorting to character attacks. I am a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, regulated by the state of Illinois. That's not an opinion. That's fact.
You keep accusing Journeys of secrecy, but I am having a hard time understanding this.
You are the moderator hiding behind an Internet handle, not I.
What isn't secret is that I made substantive rebuttals to some of your previous arguments.
It isn't secret that your calculations of our effectiveness was wrong. It isn't secret that you were wrong in portraying Journeys as only offering a "band-aid" to homelessness. It isn't secret how to call me or any other staff member at the Journeys' office.
Nor is it a secret why I am not going to go into detailed policy descriptions. For one, we have such detailed policies and procedures, it fills a binder. Clearly, I would have difficulty summarizing here. Secondly, I am not the expert on all of PADS, including the training offered, because I am the HOPE Center Director. It doesn't mean I am ignorant of things, it just means I am not going to risk giving you incorrect information about subjects I am not THE expert on, such as the training given to PADS volunteers.
I don't understand - upstream in the thread, Journeys seems to be accused of not having enough presence and communicating, yet now that I have commented, I am told my time would be better spent elsewhere.
Wondering at #14 - I am not aware of all the communications that have gone on between Park Ridge residents and Journeys. What I can tell you is that Park Ridge residents approached us with their desire to open a shelter. I think it is most accurate to say that homelessness is OUR problem, not YOURS, not MINE, because these people (and our data shows this) were predominantly raised and lived in the northwest suburbs. These are OUR neighbors, and whether WE choose to deal with this reality or not, they will still suffer.
Todd Stull
We question everything, Mr. Stull. If you find that a difficult concept to grasp, then perhaps you should not overtax your own abilities by participating here, though our door remains open for you to do so.
We do not believe that a State license necessarily confers professionalism anymore than the drivers we see on the street are capable of competing in Nascar, but go ahead and pat yourself on the back anyway.
If you find you cannot have a substantive discussion because the sentiments expressed cannot be attached to a person, then perhaps substantive discussions are not your forte, despite your professions to the contrary.
And we further note your expenditure of energy on a non-responsive response.
We stand by our calculations based on the information YOUR website put out in support of your "success". Perhaps one of your "professional" staff could undertake a more realistic presentation of Journeys from PADS to Hope data and "success".
Do you manage to get through the entirety of your procedures and policies binder during those two hour volunteer training sessions?
As for the problem of the homeless, we believe others here have adequately questioned the Park Ridge homeless problem and offered alternative solutions for our community to deal with our problems.
Thank you again for your concern.
Interestingly...Mr. Todd Stull, licensed professional social worker extraordinaire...doesn't seem to be bothered by the anonymous posters here who support the PADS homeless shelter...just the anonymous posters here who challenge him or oppose his and his organizations plans.
So much for social justice...
Thank you Todd,
And while I enjoyed the old movie: YOURS, MINE and OURS you still did not address my issue.
Frankly, I don't care if the city of PR came to you, you came to the city or if you both just happened to find each other by pure happenstance. The fact remains that NOBODY communicated to the neighbors of the church until very recently, when "they" (whomever all that may be) apparently thought the shelter was a done deal. Done enough that they announced that the shelter would be opening this fall.
Well surprise... we don't like it. We don't like the surprise, we don't like being portrayed as unchristian and we don't like being asked what we would do as an alternative.
Someone decided that the best way to approach the construct and opening of this shelter at St. Mary's, that was a long time in coming I might add, was to do it in a manner that would surprise the neighbors. Well, whomever decided that screwed up.
Had there been an open and honest discussion, initiated by St. Mary's, PADS, and the PRMA before one shovel hit the ground at St. Mary's to remodel for the shelter we all may still have had a discussion but I believe the tone and tenor would have been a lot different.
St. Mary's, PADS, and PRMA have no one to blame but themselves as to how this has evolved and for what it is doing to the neighborhood and the community.
Todd, Todd, Todd,
Based on your theory that the homeless of the NW suburbs belong to all of us, I assume you also believe that the US-Mexican border should be completely open to allow free movement between the countries. Who cares if it will diminish the quality of life on our side of the border?
Anonymous at #16 - I hope we are able to make it to this meeting. As I said before, there are processes in place to ensure safety. Convicted sex offenders and violent felony offenders are not allowed entry into PADS sites. If a client shows up for the first time at the PADS shelter, police are supposed to determine whether they are disqualified because of this.
Other PADS sites do house schools; hence this policy.
Anonymous at #21 - Center of Concern does important work and I have great respect for them. However, I think the fact that you don't "see" homeless in Park Ridge is also due to the fact that your neighbors in other villages have PADS sites open.
ParkRidgeUnderground at #24 - I think you are having difficult parsing my language. I don't have a problem having substantive arguments with someone who is anonymous. I just find it ironic, satiric even, that you decry Journeys as being secretive even as you remain mysterious.
I am sorry that you were wrong with your calculations. I can't fix that for you.
And yes, the training is able to cover the binder in two hours.
Anonymous at #25 - Actually I'd prefer if everyone would sign off on their opinions, whether they are pro or against the PADS shelter. So, yes, score for social justice! And score for me being an extraordinary social worker! Thanks for noticing!
Todd Stull
Mr. Stull,
We disagree again. It is not the PRU Crew that is secretive about positions and policies. It is merely the identies of the contributors that remain secret. In that respect, Journeys from PADS to Hope is clearly the polar opposite of the PRU Crew. Our agenda is always crystal clear.
As for our calculations, the math stands as correct based on your own reporting of numbers. But we will agree as to the GIGO aspect of the matter. If your numbers weren't garbage then you would not be able to make the claim that our calculations are erroneous.
We remain certain that yours is an ineffectual feel-good program for paid staff and volunteers.
As for covering your binder inside of a two hour volunteer training session...
If unpaid volunteers with only two hours of training are capable of carrying out the Journeys from PADS to Hope vision and mission (that must be one hell of a binder!), what exactly is the value-added nature of your "professional" paid services?
Mr. Todd,
You say you do a criminal background check. You cannot do a complete criminal background check without fingerprinting.
Do you or do you not do a complete criminal background check? If not, please tell us what you do.
Mr. Stull:
I appreciate your moxie in stepping into this fray.
Even though I have been following this discussion both on this blog and PublicWatchdog, and reading about it in the newspapers, this is the first time I've heard or seen your name mentioned. Maybe that fact is a big part of the problem PADS and its supporters are now facing with the St. Mary's neighbors - and a lot of the rest of us, as well.
Mr. Skull, How do the goals of Journeys from Pads to Hope equate to the goals of the U.S. Conference of Mayors - 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness? Chicago & the NW suburbs have a symbiotic relationship, and the Plan seems to have a very different focus.
OK Todd, I'll bite. What proof do you have that PADS shelters in other towns has solved a homeless problem we did not know we have? Go down to Vine Street Deli and get some of their excellent potato salad with your baloney.
According to Journey's to Hope's own audit, approximately 30% of the homeless that are sheltered at the PADS site are mentally ill, another 30% are active drug users and many are mentally ill active drug users. I'm sorry, but having this cocktail of individuals so close to the children of the neighborhood makes absolutely no sense. All involved are engaging in a process of deception, including the Mayor and his staff.
If common sense prevails this shelter will never be allowed to open at this location.
Todd says:
"Convicted sex offenders and violent felony offenders are not allowed entry into PADS sites."
OK, then Todd, soothe the mothers and the fathers with what happens next?
Do the volunteers with 2 hours of training bar the door and send them out to wander the neighborhood?
Wondering at #26 - Now if that is the crux of the issue, then I truly am sorry about the miscommunication. I personally had no idea of these types of concerns in Park Ridge until yesterday. We aren't administering 18 other shelter sites in your neighboring villages by somehow foisting it on people or being secretive. We can address legitimate concerns.
My worry is that perceived stereotypes about individuals that are homeless will get in the way.
Anonymous at #27 - Interesting attempt at a straw man argument. Place words in my mouth, and then knock the argument down. First, I don't know what border issues have to do with homelessness. And second, no I don't believe in an unrestricted border. Perhaps it would be best to ask me before assuming.
ParkRidgeUnderground at #29 - Is there anything that would convince you Journeys is more than an "ineffectual feel-good program"? I'm just asking to gauge whether you are interested in a dialog. I certainly respect your opinion, but please don't think you can make false statements without them being challenged. The only garbage in the numbers are yours.
As for the volunteer training, the PADS shelters function as one level of care. The HOPE Center functions as a second, more comprehensive level of care. So, those clients using the shelter can come to the Center for case management and counseling. That's the value added. Helping people get jobs, find child care, get into nursing homes.
Jean Dietsch at #30 - We do not fingerprint. Contrary to your assertion, it is possible to do a criminal background check without fingerprints.
Dave Kovice at #31 - I appreciate this feedback. It is definitely something we will be talking about back at the Journeys office.
Anonymous at #32 - The Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness is something that the Suburban Cook County Alliance to End Homelessness has undoubtedly considered in making their own community wide plans. I can't speak to the mayoral conference because I have not been involved on that level.
Anonymous at #33 - With that potato salad and baloney, I'll bring some pudding, because as they say, the proof is in the pudding. I guess my proof are the people who come to my center who recently resided in Park Ridge and are now homeless. What other proof were you thinking of?
Anonymous at #34 - What are you afraid of from these clients who are mentally ill or substance users? Before they become demonized, perhaps we should consider some realities. After the recent shooting at NIU, I read in the Daily Herald that mentally ill clients are more likely than non-mentally ill clients to be victims (not perpetrators) of crimes. Every person who is mentally ill is somebody's son, daughter, wife, husband, mother, or relative. Many mentally ill individuals are asymptomatic because they are receiving treatment. We aren't talking about bogeymen here, we are talking about people who are depressed or bipolar or have one of a number of diagnoses.
As for the substance users, one common substance being used is alcohol. Yes there are clients who use other drugs, some illegal, but again, it is unfair to conflate drug use, mental illness, or both into being a danger to children. In addition, as I stated upstream, for those clients who have a violent history, they are not eligible for the shelters because of criminal history. If they attempt to enter the shelters, police are called.
Readers may find http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/jvq/CV26.pdf to be interesting. I think it serves as a good analogy. Family perpetrators are disproportionately represented among kidnappers and sex offenders. However, this doesn't mean that we stop family members as a group from sleeping in the same house as our children, does it, just because it's more likely that the average family member will commit these crimes rather than the average stranger? My point is that individuals need to be assessed as individuals rather than as a part of a group. If an individual is deemed a risk, than the individual is prevented from entering the shelter. It's not fair to demonize an entire group of individuals become one or more in the group has committed a crime.
Todd Stull
To the anonymous poster who submitted a 10:25 comment,
Your comment was rejected because you stated you a Park Ridge resident. We have reason to believe otherwise.
We don't post things we believe to be lies.
Mr. Stull:
You asked,
ParkRidgeUnderground at #29 - Is there anything that would convince you Journeys is more than an "ineffectual feel-good program"?
The answer is yes, better verifiable results.
Again, we did the math based on the numbers YOUR website spouts. Our calculations are absolutely correct, based on the numbers YOUR website spouts.
If there is a total potential pool of 1600 homeless in the northwest suburbs, according to your own website, and your "success" was to transition only "39 out of homelessness", then your "success" rate stands at 2%.
We suppose your organization may be using those estimates in some misleading fashion, intentionally or otherwise, to make it seem as if you have more contact with the homeless than you actually do.
Nowhere on your site does it mention the numbers you have posted here on PRU, unless we missed it.
The Park Ridge community is a generous one. Our residents are very volunteer minded. The PRU Crew will never merely sit back and watch as an outside agency attempts to get a foot-hold in our community and exploit that generosity and volunteer spirit, for whatever agenda it and its adherents may have in mind.
Finally, we appreciate your admitting that your PADS program has a function distinct from your Journeys program; the PADS program being "a hot and a flop" for a night. You did say that the PADS clients can come to the Hope center for a higher level of care, but we note that you did not say they are required to.
And that lack of requirement means that the PADS program is enabling those who persist in the homeless "lifestyle", what other agencies and entities have been honest enough to call the "frequent flyers".
To the anonymous poster making the claim about Napleton Cadillac, we would love more information and some source of proof.
I am a PADS volunteer... I can tell you Police verify guests identity and screen for warrants or any past crimes that would be of concern (dangerous nature) before the are checked in for the 1st time and then a more thorough background check is done at the Hope Center before they are anyone is allowed to enter other PADS sites on a regular basis. A PADS site is almost in my backyard so I feel I am able to speak up to you about this... and I can tell you that I dont worry about my safety or my children's safety and I rarely am even aware the shelter is in operation! I actually feel safer ( and better about myself!) in the cold winter months knowing that people living on the streets have a a safe place to turn rather than be hidingout in a doorway or panhandling... PADS has improved out neighborhoods, instead of hurting them. Give it a chance and see what happens. If you are concerned you should get involved and volunteer and see how it works and meet the people you are so afraid of. You will be surprised.
I can also assure that the people who utilize the shelter are from the suburbs...their last known address was in the NW Suburbs, they are not being bussed in from the South Side, or Wisconsin etc...they are OUR (this means YOURS too) Homeless.
I just read a newspaper article that stated residents are concerned that a "child molester" could be at the shelter... As an active PADS volunteer I can tell you that any kind of sex offense (child or otherwise), arson or violent crime (murder) would not get past the police initial screening. The Police Department would not want someone like that in the shelter with "volunteers" ...and the Police would not want such a person wandering your streets so the police could escort them to a more appropriate shelter ( run by the Department of Corrections... not in your neighborhood church basement!) PADS would actually be helping keep the streets safer in some ways.
Anonymous April 5, 2008 1:46 PM, that makes no sense. The Department of Corrections does not run homeless shelters. They run jails. The police can't put people in jail for past crimes. The police can only put people in jail if they have got outstanding warrants or do a criminal act. The police can only know about criminals if they have got charges against them.
I could be wrong but if you know of where the Department of Corrections has a homeless shelter that they run, I would feel better knowing about that.
Why are the supporters of the PADS shelter trying to make this a religious or moral issue? This is a social/public policy/political issue. Just because the churches are behind it doesn't make it religious.
The churches are behind this and the PADS people tell us we have nothing to fear from criminal deviants.
I'm sorry. I am still worried for the children in the area where more homeless will be coming to.
I am worried that the PADS people have the best intentions but maybe the volunteers are naeve or that they are just trying to calm everyone for promoting their program.
I am very sorry about that I have to say the church institutions do not have the greatest history record of keeping our children safe from pedophiles.
I am not willing to be taking these risks.
I'm sorry.
ParkRidgeUnderground
You persist in using 1600 as the number of total homeless. First, that number fluctuates. I will be the first to admit that getting a "true" count of those who are homeless is difficult, and that any number is just a point in time.
Second, Journeys never claimed we see 1600 clients per year. I gave you accurate verifiable numbers upstream regarding our effectiveness. You persist in using numbers that misrepresent our effectiveness because to use the accurate verifiable numbers I gave you blows up one of your arguments. There's no deception here; I told you how many clients we see (approximately) each year. You can always look at our Annual Reports as well. Do you have an Annual Report of your effectiveness that I could look at?
Also, you are wrong saying that clients are not required to go to the HOPE Center. To use the shelters for longer than a week, they do have to come to the HOPE Center. Perhaps you need to do some better research. Just because you make false statements does not make them true.
Todd Stull
Police do not charge people with past offenses ( they simply screen for outstanding warrants ) but when appropriate they can direct someone to a diffent facilty... if someone has a warrant the police would simply do their job and proceed by taking the individual to the police station... there are no shelters in the NW Suburbs that are run by the DOC (Dept of Corrections) but there are some in the Chicago city limits that are run by trained professionals who are better equipped to deal with such issues...PR Police could not/would not deliver someone to these places- but a train ticket could be given or some other method to direct someone away from this shelter or town- if an individual chooses not to go, than its their choice and they would have to find alternate shelter themselves- if they dont cooperate than the Police would again be involved as they would be trespassing etc- PADS is a free, emergency shelter, and has the right (and obligation) to refuse service to anyone deemed unsafe for the safety of all the other indivuals in the shelter both homeless people and volunteer staff- know that PADS does not invite, welcome or allow indivuals that pose a risk to others to their shelters. They are directed else where but they are responsible for their own decisions and face appropriate consequenses.
Mr. Stull:
Perhaps you should be more forthcoming from the start. And for the final time, we suggest your "professional" staff attend to the task of presenting clearer and more accurate information on YOUR website. You may not have made the claim, but your organization clearly has sought to leave a certain impression.
You, Mr. Stull, are a manipulative tool for an organization with a social agenda that goes far beyond your stated claims, and hides its intentions behind the communities of faith which you exploit for your own tangible and intangible, certainly lack-luster, gains.
You see, Mr. Stull, we've done quite a lot of research.
Todd,
You asked what I (#34) am afraid of with respect to substance abuse in conjunction with mental illness. Do you verify that all your shelter users are taking their medication as prescribed? Even if they are, a cocktail of medication with either alcohol or illegal drugs does not render a person sane or safe for that matter.
What I am most afraid of is that even one of the individuals may leave a used needle in the vicinity of the church and that one of the local children comes in contact with it and possibly gets infected by it. That to me would be the real tragedy. I did own a place next to a shelter/church in the city at one time - and I did find drug paraphernalia, condoms, etc. around my property quite regularly. My property was also burned to the ground during construction and needles etc. were found on the site by the fire investigators - perhaps a cruel coincidence. So, I feel I have some legitimate reasons to be concerned, if not afraid. The rosey picture you paint is just that.
Would you disclose if there were any police complaints filed against any of your other shelters in the past two years and, if so, if any were pertaining to drug paraphernalia?
Sincerely,
#34
Mr. Todd,
According to the FBI, The Police, The Park Ridge School District and The Park District, A full criminal Background check cannot be done without fingerprinting.
In Park Ridge, You have to be fingerprinted to work anywhere at the school, if you want to coach baseball, or science olympiads as a volunteer, and if you want to help with the school lunchprogram. And they will make you go back each year and get fingerprinted again. So don't give us your BS about your full background checks!
Anonymous @ 4:22 states several instances where the PR police would need to be involved.
This is clearly not a religious issue. You are talking about increasing the potential need for our Police officers, already feeling stressed, with more workload to escort drug users, mentally ill who are off their meds, sexual predators, etc, to public transportation where they "may or may not" choose to leave.
Prove to us that you are not creating an attractive nuisance by hosting a homeless shelter in such a residential neighborhood.
Who is paying for the increased workload on our Police?
And while we are at it, what if you have a medical emergency and call an ambulance? Are you paying for the call?
Oh, by the way, this Church is in a residential area, so I am sure the residents nearby will always welcome the additional sirens, traffic and flashing lights. Maybe if they kept it in their parking lot it wouldn't be so disturbing - oh, wait, they don't have a parking lot.
Jean,
You are not completely correct.
I can't speak for the lunch programs or science olympiads, but for the other items you mention you are wrong.
I've coached soccer and baseball in this town for many years (including this one). Never have I submitted fingerprints. There is a standard form that is used that I have been filling out for many years, never submitting fingerprints.
I'm not arguing with you on your other points, or even taking a position on if submitting fingerprints is vital...I am just telling you to coach in this town you are not required to submit to fingerprinting.
Maybe we should build the shelter. Looks like Napleton will be out on the street. But I digress. did anyone attend the meeting at the library this morning? I'd love to hear what happened.
to Kaiser,
I was told by neighbors of St. Mary's today that they started fingerprinting for coaching this year! The other fingerprinting I can personally vouch for.
Let's change the subject here for just a second.........thank you.
1. We now know that Naleton Cad/Buick/Pontiac is closing its doors this May 2nd. All reconfirmed after speaking with a sale rep.
2. We also know that Billy and Howard
were meeting for a long period even before this came up on the table for any consideration and a vote on his property.
2. Part of the deal - as posted in he local rag was to keep the doors open at the new site.
3. Billy made a threat to leave the city confines if he didn't get his money.
4. Now....it all falls into place.
This was all a ploy and I would ask that the US Atty here in Chicago be contacted to look into this scam of a deal.
In the end - we the citzens and tax payers all got screwed.
Is that the spring winds I hear blowing........through.
Thank you.
Jean,
Not looking to hijack the PADS discussion into one of fingerprints, but those folks telling you otherwise are not right. Neither baseball or soccer are making their coaches submit fingerprints.
Kaiser
The Left is moving in...........
Anon@April 6, 2008 7:27 AM
You persistence and insistence is interesting, and we feel you should have your say, so we have posted your latest comment.
We would still like to see some proof.
God help us all.
I have two issues with this PADS thing. The first is if they do health screenings and how thoroughly they do health screenings. I do not want to invite TB infectious homeless persons into my neighborhood who will then go hang out at the Library or the train station when the shelter isn't open. The second issue is a question that if the PADS people are doing more than a hot and a flop as the PRU calls it, then why aren't they open all year around? All the problems that exist in cold weather for homeless persons also exist in the warm months, except for the temperature difference.
Out of Mary Seat.....Father Gundersons' Sunday service was a call to arms.
There have been more negative calls about the shelter than possitive, so all those in favor of the shelter go home and call your Alderman.
PRU readers we are calling you to arms as well. If you are not in favor af the shelter for whatever reason call your alderman, in fact, call ALL the alderman.
Should have been there on veterans day - for one. The church members there have fled over from MSW to St. Paul of the Cross - really. The left agenda continues there at MSW.
Hopefully, the Cardinal who is looking into that misguided crew will take action. The response letter from the Cardinal was in fact condemming politics at the pulpit - there.
Let's take it up a notch.
You can loose you 501c3 status and have it suspended by the IRS - should they be found in fact using the church for the purposes other than for religious activities as outlined in the charter.
Thank you.
wow- I heard their was some people are protesting this shelter coming to town so I was trying to find out why and I found this web page- sounds like people are afraid that some church letting around a dozen people sleep in their building for one night a week makes the neighborhood uneasy. SO I search the Illinois Sex offender registry and came up with 5 adult sex offenders, and 4 hurt children and they live and breathe in the Park Ridge city limits everyday. That's obviously fine with everyone since they can pay their rent. Along comes this organization screens their candidates so they keep problems to a minimal and everyone is up in arms. The registered offenders can't live with in a certain distance from a school but they could live on a bus stop and watch your kids everyday.
Since when can a town tell a church what ministries they can have and which they cannot? I bet there are bingo nights at other churches that will draw more commotion than a dozen homeless people ever could.
I dont get it.
And if it causes problems dont you think the church will pull out. I cant imagine they want to cause the neighborhood problems.
Whatever. Just one opinion.
Parkridgeunderground:
In response to your statement:
"You, Mr. Stull, are a manipulative tool for an organization with a social agenda that goes far beyond your stated claims, and hides its intentions behind the communities of faith which you exploit for your own tangible and intangible, certainly lack-luster, gains."
What exactly are you getting at? I'm always up for a good argument; however, it appears that while Mr. Stull is making valid arguments, you resort to petty claims of "hidden intentions and social agendas". Have you ever worked for a non-for-profit? Mr. Stull has listed his qualifications. He could quite easily have his own practice helping “privileged” individuals such as yourself making at least twice what he makes working at Journeys. You make it sound like his, and the organization’s, intentions are purely for profit (the tangible as you imply) or political gain. What on earth would they have to gain besides helping those less fortunate than you or I? Would you rather the homeless be walking around on the streets? Hanging out at the train station? Bus stops? You act as if by having the shelter in Park Ridge that swarms of homeless people will be invited into your, our, city. Lastly, I think there is this mental image of a homeless person being a dirty, old man who has made poor decisions and this is the result. Not all homeless people are criminals and sex offenders. Albeit rare, what about the women that are homeless? Shouldn’t they have a place to feel safe? Sometimes it’s not all about the choices we make, but the crap that life throws our way. Including the fact that you can’t help who your parents are, sometimes you are born into homelessness or near homelessness without a choice.
Instead of resorting to claims of hidden agendas, why not support your claims. Mr. Stull certainly has.
In response to Anonymous April 6, 2008, 4:21 PM
Indeed, we at Journeys are worried about tuberculosis as well. If any reader is unfamiliar with tuberculosis, I suggest looking at the Center for Disease Control's website.
That is why we require all clients who use the shelter to come into the HOPE Center undergo a free TB screening, or provide medical documentation of a recent screening. I appreciate your concern. We are partnered with Chicago Health Outreach and Northwest Community Healthcare to assist with health needs.
The primary reason the shelters aren't open year round out in the suburbs is because we do not have enough volunteers to run it year round. Given limited resources, we do the best we can during the coldest months of the year.
Anonymous April 5, 2008 9:08 PM
As someone else mentioned, the community should be safer with one known place where individuals who are homeless are staying. They will be in a supervised environment where, on the rare occasion that police intervention would be needed, the police should be familiar with the physical location and volunteers.
As for who pays for police, the local taxpayers. As for who pays for the ambulance, I cannot speak for Park Ridge, but in my experience the client is billed for the ambulance transport. If they are unable to pay, they generally work that out with the hospital or ambulance firm. Please realize that calling emergency services to save someone's life is a necessary and rare occurrence. It does not occur on what I would describe as a regular (weekly or even monthly) basis.
An interesting fact is that one of the criticisms of the HOPE Center before it opened in Palatine was that it would greatly stress out emergency services in Palatine. It turns out when they looked at the data, local department stores had more emergency service calls than us. I'm not saying that's the case every month, or that we haven't had times where we had to call the ambulance or police more than once in a day even; however, the HOPE Center sees about four times the amount of clients each day than what the PADS site in Park Ridge will see the one night a week it is open.
Anonymous April 5, 2008 5:55 PM
I am truly sorry about your experiences. I too would never want a child to find a used syringe. It's not like Journey's staff don't care about children, or have children ourselves. I spent some time as a school social work intern, so I am in tune with parent's concerns. (Incidentally, when I had a background check done for the Chicago Public schools in 2002, I didn't get fingerprinted.)
I think there are some important differences between Chicago and Park Ridge. Chicago has a much higher population and their police department seems to be woefully inadequate to handle the number of crimes that occur. Also, there are many neighborhoods that don't seem to have the cohesiveness to watch out for their children, something that does not seem to be lacking in Park Ridge.
Further, PADS volunteers are always on the lookout for bizarre behavior. I personally do not know of any instances where someone injected drugs on the PADS premises or near them. If someone tried to, a volunteer would notice this person being "high" quickly. As for criminal complaints, I'm not aware of any. Don't take my word for it though; I believe that would be a matter of public record.
To be honest, someone who is using needles is usually a heroin user. In my experience, we don't see many heroin users come through our doors. Those that do avoid the shelters; they prefer to shoot up in someone's house or motel where they can have privacy. A shared shelter with volunteers around is not a place where they can fly under the radar doing that. Also, as heroin use is generally more expensive than other drugs such as cannabis or alcohol, individuals that are homeless generally can't afford it.
I'm not trying to paint a rosy picture. We know some of our clients use substances, and we know some of them are mentally ill. This does not immediately translate into them being a danger to anyone, including themselves. And still, there are some people who we deal with who have a history of criminal behavior, and we have processes in place to deal with these situations in a calm and effective manner.
Todd Stull
We currently do not have a "homeless" problem in Park Ridge, so why create one by building a homeless shelter? Despite the often wordy description by PADS to try to convince us otherwise, we would just be inviting trouble into our community. We have all worked hard to buy and maintain our homes and our great neighborhood, so why is PADS trying to make us feel guilty if we don't allow the homeless in? They cannot believe that we are so naive as to think there will be no homeless hanging around outside, that there will be no crime from these people trying to hang out in vacant buildings, and that they will not eventually be approaching our children for money? Common sense would dictate that if you bring these people to this type of neighborhood, they will constantly be observing what we have and what they don't have, trouble will follow. We should not let the people from PADS try to guilt us into this. Our residents- seniors, empty nesters, families, and especially, our children, should continue to have a safe place to live. We don't want live our lives in fear or guilt- this is our neighborhood, and we chose to live here based on good schools, great housing, a family community and low crime. We also pay a lot of property taxes to maintain this lifestyle, and PADS should not be the one to take this away from us.
I have been doing the homework that the PADS people have been telling people here to do. I found that the PADS has broken the IRS law for political activity by making campaign contributions to candidates. They made three campaign contributions to two candidates. The PADS should have their charity status revoked for breaking the law.
Anon@11:00AM:
We did see those. However, the two contributions made by Journeys from PADS to Hope to the McPartlin campaign were made almost 7 yrs ago, and the contribution check made by the Elgin PADS organization is reported by Citizens for Hoeft as never having been cashed.
Our doing of our homework seems to indicate that, unless Journeys/PADS has been flying under the political activity reporting radar, they've managed to keep their noses clean for the last 6 yrs.
Post a Comment