I understand some people think the holier than thou approach is a valid one to take in a discussion but please forgive me for not sharing that view. I would not feel comfortable having one of these projects in my neighborhood without having the increased crime risk addressed.

I am not interested in the tired display of statistics that supporters of this thinking use to try to make people concerned about such things look bad. I am interested in what I have seen with my own two eyes in my lifetime. That includes seeing bums panhandling downtown during the morning, staggering out of the Minnesota Avenue crackhouses in the afternoon and heading back toward downtown for the evening. I have seen some of these bums for decades, such as the tall skinny mustached man with the dark bushy perm who roams Cumberland Avenue asking for change and muttering about sunshine reality I assume these are the people these projects are aimed at and have never been informed otherwise when asked but also have never had the question definitively answered.

I understand these programs are being marketed as an attempt to help disabled and chronically homeless people. I also understand that as defined by HUD, substance abuse is considered a disabling position. I also believe that if the plans call for opening these programs to substance abusers that are chronically homeless there should be a lot more talk about safety than there is.

I can see you feel strongly about your beliefs but there has to be more respectful dialogue than this.

He and Roddy both. I freely admit of the three I would trust Becker the most because his is just a lack of full understanding of the issue. With Bailey and Roddy I believe they are willfully failing to listen to concerns and don't trust their judgment at all on the issue.