I’m writing this letter to try and clear up Ms. Koch’s confusion. Had she been at the meeting of concerned people, she would have known that the concerns were privacy and the safety of the neighboring children. She also would have known that these concerns were addressed.

The article referred to the people as being “homeless.” You say they are “individuals in transition.” This is true, but they do not have a place to call home, which accounts for the term homeless. And they are without homes when they enter the Victory Center.

At the meeting, the Victory Center representatives wanted to explain what they were all about and inform people that they screen all residents as best they can. They do not tolerate any drug or alcohol usage by residents. They also stress that they all must hold jobs, pay child support ( if applicable) and participate in religious services. It also was explained that the reason many residents are seen milling around outside is because they are not allowed to smoke inside the facility which can affect maintaining a cohesive environment in the surrounding area. (As you stated it.)

I believe in “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brother,” but also have concerns what the “least of my brothers will do unto me.”

As for your curiosity as to whether these are new concerns or standard procedures when new people move into the neighborhood, the public was invited to the Victory Center to air concerns and learn what their mission is in the city.

I suggested that their name should be changed from a homeless shelter to something more appropriate to coincide with their many programs.

If an apartment house owner in our neighborhood offered to listen to input from neighbors on their apartment rentals, I would offer my opinions if asked.

You still have to consider this home (former St. Mary’s convent, now Prince of Peace Business Office) is the only 32 bedroom-home in the neighborhood, which could possible house 64 people with two beds to a room. I also realize that 26,000 people in the city are more than willing to support this move because it’s not in the neighborhood.

I would suggest that if you were concerned, curious or left puzzled about what happened at the meeting you should have gone to it.

Mr. and Mrs. John Sullivan,

Clinton



This Week's Circulars