I am seeing that the comments on the last thread went there, so here is my two cents for what it’s worth. I am not unhappy with the overall behavior of John Lewis Coffee Shop. I think that there is a genuine need to help the homeless and people who are going through a hard time. I’m just not sure that JLCS is doing this in a way that is best for the community. As my thought process developed on this, I decided to consult with some people that I know… a few Davenport Police officers and a Davenport Firefighter, who also works part time on the ambulance in Davenport.
The accusations always fly about how JLCS attracts crime and the homeless are the cause of it. Though I appreciate the concern of neighbors, the police do not seem to be overly concerned with them, as they have far more issues with rental properties than JLCS could ever dream of. It seems that the overwhelming consensus is that the issue with JLCS residents is that they are frequently intoxicated and sleeping in back yards, alleys, etc. As far as their crime actually having a victim, it doesn’t seem to be overwhelming as it is made out to be. In addition, I wouldn’t attribute this to JLCS alone, it would happen anyway.
The other consensus, which tends to rely on less speculation, is that JLCS is much bigger than it needs to be. The majority of the residents that the police and medical personnel deal with are not from here. The homeless do state on a regular basis to the police that they came here because they heard about the benefits and services that were available.
Of the roughly 3 million that JLCS has spent in their fiscal year ending 2005, half of it was on salaries. A large portion of dollars are involved in development as well. With the closing of the lunch time meal that they served, a seemingly lower expense than the development that they are doing (160K vs. 2.5m in outstanding mortgages), seems to make it look like they are more interested in growing and obtaining property then they are “…work(ing) with the greater community in challenging the root causes of poverty and affecting systemic change through development activities.” It seems to me that if you are going to address the root cause of poverty you should provide food, shelter and programs to get people back to work, and in their own homes. That doesn’t mean to me that you should spend millions in public funds to develop consolidated areas of affordable housing that has the potential to lower property values, i.e. Cobblestone.
To me if JLCS wants the support of the community they need to stop attracting homeless here, working to provide needed services which should focus on providing food and temporary shelter and truly affect systemic change. I am very much into philanthropy and helping the poor, but I do not support taking it so far as to negatively impact our community.
Source: www.guidestar.org, JLCS FYE 2005 IRS 990.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
I agree, if JLCS concentrated on their original founding mission there would be community support to feed the homeless and provide temporary housing. The community outreach programs are better served by other social agencies. If JLCS partnered with the social service agencies to provide referral, that seems reasonable, but, it stops there.
I think you need to seperate JLCS, their mission and services from past management. Kate Ridge let a lot of people down, after she spent great time visioning a mission of housing support.
She sold local, state and federal officials on the need for housing support. It was clear a void for housing and stabalization was needed, not for out of town drunks, but for single mom's with kids, elderly with no support, ect...
If you take the mens shelter (still operational) and cafe out of the mix, JLCS was serving housing needs to a large mix of elderly female and single mom's with kids.
Ridge demonstrated her ability to meet housing needs, and promised operational funds existed. She sold her vision to local bankers (who financed the private side), local council members, even Harkin & Grassley's federal support.
If you look at the redevelopment of the old friendly house and the side by side red bricks on 3rd Street, it appeared management had the skills necessary to meet this need.
Again, it was Kate Ridge that sold this as a necessary need. And at the time, no other entity was willing to serve this need (The Salvation Army, Sisters of Humility, ect)...
So it burns my butt, after all of this, that Kate slips out of town, and indicates she was a "big picture thinker"... She had promised and demonstrated to others, that she was far more.
So the void still exist, to some extent. The down and out, unlucky or unwise have few alternatives for housing. A glance at todays QCT classifieds indicate numerous "rent to own" options, that will likely recycle these "needy" into the same old, same old cycle.
But prior management offered a solution, that I and others thought to be sound and reasonable. It was Kate Ridge, not JLCS that failed to deliver.
So I will never second guess my support for the vision or need, but truly regret believing in the messenger.
There is something called a board. They failed us too. They supported Cobblestone and Ridge without actually listening to the people of this town. What they did instaed was demonize the residents of the central city. Called us poor haters and racists instead of listening. They are at fault as well and need to be held accountable. Not one member who supported Ridge shoudl be a part of the board now. Are they?
I hope the organization gets it together for the sake of the people in the housing. What makes me upset is that the organization fails to understand its impact on the city.
Payne - I doubt you have actually spoken to the policemen and you have not checked the crime stats. Go do that and report back.
1:28....awww poor Thomas has posted only his 2nd "gig," And you are you ALREADY calling him a liar? He said that he has a few Davenport police officers as friends, and that he consulted them about this subject. Can you READ? Maybe he doesnt have all the stats, or answers, but talking with several police officers about this topic gives Thomas a "pulse" of what he is talking about. DUH!
I will weigh in on the accusation. Note that I stated they do not significantly contribute to crime with the exception of victimless crime. The officers, two of which work the areas dominated by JLCS properties, one in the evening and one in the overnight, did not seem to think there was a recognizable call volume from crime attributed to JLCS inhabitants. They did relay a significant call volume to victimless crime, mostly nusiance, intoxication and panhandling. To me if you want to make an argument that a group is vastly contributing to crime there should be some loss involved and a victim.
I would suggest if you want to make accusations that I am fabricating anything you please do the same as I and ask not one, but several Davenport officers, especially ones that work in that area and if you are going to point to a "crime statistic" that you please provide a reference to that. I so far cannot find a statistic that is published directly relating JLCS to criminal activity. Thank you.
There are no such things as victimless crimes. For those living and owning property in that area and the surrounding areas, these panhandlers and drunks are a real problem. But then again, we are not valued by the rest of Davenport. I forgot. Where I live makes a difference. We deserve this kind of crime.
Payne - I think you are confused. What is the impact of JLCS on this community. If you think they attract homeless people, then what kind of impact does that have. I am insulted that you think there is a such a think as victimless crime. Where do you live sir? Let me guess, not in the central community circle.
4:57 and 4:59. I apologize. I agree with your statements. What I considered crime versus more of a nuisance in my mind may have been misconstrued. Nuisance laws address criminal issues as well. I do not want to downplay the negative impact that JLCS has on the area. I admit, I did not take into account the monetary damage they do in relation to property value. Thank you for your comments.
I said the same thing years ago, speaking from personal experience, and I was still shouted down by the people who can't accept anything but negative facts about JLCS.
Homeless guys aren't the ones driving around shooting up the city, running from traffic stops, or causing 14th and Gaines to be a warzone. You could argue that the vandalism-type crimes create a feel of malaise and run-down neighborhoods that allows other criminals to operate, except the very worst neighborhoods in Davenport aren't where JLCS is! Unless I missed their shelter on Heatherton Drive.
pAIN
tHE QUESTION WAS,
wHERE IN DAVENPORT DO YOU LIVE?
tHANKS
kEITH
Keith, what does it matter where any of us live? ais there an address that allows your cares to be significant?
I find it funny that JLCS biggest critic, the former 3rd ward Alderman had a yard sign in one of the Cobblestone properties. (straight across the street from the polling place) And yes, well with-in the 300 foot rule of a polling place.
So much for NOT campaigning. LOL.
kEITH
tHE ANSWER IS,
i LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS
tHANKS
pAIN
It does matter where people live. It matters because if you don't live close to this stuff, you really have no idea what it is like to be a part of this all. It is easy to say that we need to help people, but would you voluntarily live next to a homeless shelter? The impact of the homeless in the central city huge. We create a transient community with lots of shelters and rentals and so forth. We create a concentrated environment for the poor and transient and then think it doesn't impact our overall health as a city. If you don't see it everyday - you don't have a clue of its impact.
Do you really want the entire central city to be rentals? Transient? What this is is destabilization of the city. We need to be working HARD to go the other direction with this area of town and not fighting over who is right or who is righteous. I hear people who want a resolution to the slum rentals allowed to thrive amongst the homeless shelters and transitional housing. Because they can. We allow it because it is the area of town it happens in. An overreaching homeless service population creates an environment of blight and yes - QCI - crime. It cuases people to not want to own homes here and not want to raise children here and so forth. So QCI - why did you leave the central city for the burbs?
I certainly do not live in what anyone would call the suburbs. I doubt I will ever live north of Kimberly... unless maybe in your favorite project, Prairie Heights...
mR pAIn, tHAt wAs tOOO FUnnY oF A cOMeBacK. prECiOuS, sIMplY PreCiOuS. reALLy LoL, i MeAN OUT LOUD!!
I love Prairie Heights what are you crazy. I love it - no really. New urbansim is awsome. Good for us and you cannot find it anywhere else in this city. I'm serious. I love new urbanism. NU NU NU NU RAH RAH RAW!
QCI - I guess I am just curious as to why you think Praire Heights is a good thing. What do you like about it? With the markey crashing and the number of available and affordable homes in Davenport on the rise, why do you think we need more new houses built here? I think it will only hurt this town. I recall a long time ago during the heart of the debate, the real estate Attorney, biz partner of former councilman McGivern, associate of real estate tycoon and real estate lawyer steve shawlk and owner of much of Prarie Heights land (how enmeshed is that - only in Davenport) - once said that the market is not wanting new urbanism. How much to you want to bet that the place is not new urbanism. How about thinking about the impact of sprawl on our downtown neighborhoods? We have many homes that need an owner in areas already existing. It makes sense to see that connection instread of building unecessary development. We cannot afford to stretch our services anymore.
This is getting so far off topic, but I believe in PH because some people will always insist on living in newer homes. Whether they lack the knowledge or willingness to take care of an old home, or whatever, there will always be a desire for new development. So we can either tell potential residents desiring newer homes to check out Bettendorf, keep building crap like we have been over the last 2 decades, or try something new (or old?) in New Urbanism. Hopefully it sells so well that we see the end of cul-de-sac filled subdivisions with front-facing 3 car garages.
Gosh QCI where has you been. We have way too many new homes for sale on our sprawling outskirts to use that as a reason to support PH. Please. That is plain stupid.
QCI thanks I agree with you about Prairie Heights. I too love new urbanism. As for JLCS anyone that thinks they have caused damage to the area must have short memories. The area was a mess until John Lewis stepped in and started to rehab in the area. They have cleaned up much of the area. I also don't have the hate Kate Ridge mentality. Did she make a hugh business mistake? Certainly!! Is she an evil woman that intentionally bilked the community? No way!! I get tired of the people in this community that are so quick to jump on people when they are down. Since the oppressed quickly become the oppressors it makes me think we must have a large number of oppressed people in this community. How much better life would be if we would throw out all our negative thoughts and replace them with positive thinking.
If you don't live in an area effected by JLCS - why do you even comment? Your neighborhoods aren't effected. But, recall that Ms. Ridge and her lame duck board took millions in your tax dollars and wasted them. Not to mention the thousands in donations. If you live in a clean and safe and non-rental/transient area, then you have no clue.
3rd Street Mart Liq. license has been revoked!!!!!!!
Where will all the homeless men buy their beer now? I am sure the not for profits will be screaming about where the men can't tie one on. Probably will use tax dollars to build a new liqupr mart with a computer lab.
Oh and don't worry - it won't be in your neighborhood.
So you can support it - it is okay. Donate $$ to it, don't ask questions and write lots of supportive letters to the editor and criticize the people who speak against it.
Hey Pain.
I had the feeling you were a jerk. Thanks for verify, it.
At least QCI doesn't jerk people around, and had the balls to let us know where he (lives)lived.
Also sorry about hitting the Caps lock key.
Oh - I don't know - I think QCI is somewhat of a jerk.
Oh Keith, you sure have been showing your true colors of as late with all of your name calling, mud slinging, cut downs, verbal insults here, and everywhere else in blog o' land. So much for the "poor Keith" syndrome, you are just a hate filled man anymore. You are just power hungry, and everyone refuses to feed you anymore. Go hungry.
The clock is ticking.
Post a Comment