Yesterday’s Park Ridge Herald-Advocate contains what might best be described as the “manifesto” of the Park Ridge Ministerial Association on bringing a PADS homeless shelter to Park Ridge (“Ministerial Association reports on choice to move PADS to St. Paul’s,” June 12).

That the PRMA sees the need for such a public relations/propaganda effort suggests that the vocal opposition to its heavy-handed and arrogant decision is registering with at least some of that group, and maybe even its co-conspirator, PADS to HOPE, Inc.  It may even suggest a concern by the PRMA about rumors of a backlash that could start showing up in the collection basket – or, perhaps more accurately, not showing up in the collection basket. 

We encourage everyone to read that essay and give it some “critical thinking” not only to what it says but, more importantly, to what it doesn’t say.  And just to get that ball rolling, here are a few of our “critical” questions and comments:

* The proposed St. Paul location is “[a] short walk from a public transportation hub, along a primarily commercial pathway.”  If the Park Ridge shelter is supposed to serve the Park Ridge homeless, why exactly does it need to be near public transportation?  Unless, of course, it is actually intended to serve a homeless contingent commuting into Park Ridge from elsewhere, as the PADS critics have been contending.

* The proposed St. Paul location will provide “[a]dequate space for 20 overnight guests.”  Weren’t we being told only weeks ago that the Park Ridge PADS shelter was only going to house 10-15 homeless?  Is this the first sign of the “bracket creep” that PADS critics have been warning about?

* PRMA members are pushing the PADS shelter in the face of community opposition because they are “people who have experienced God’s incredible compassion and undeserved love in [their] own lives.”  Are they suggesting that they’re the only people in Park Ridge who have had that kind of religious experience?  Can you say “holier than thou”?

* PRMA members are “motivated because [they] know that, as [they] follow the way of Jesus, [their] efforts make a real difference in the lives of those who suffer and are in need.”
Are they suggesting that those who oppose the homeless shelter or who are critics of PADS are not following “the way of Jesus”?  And what about any atheists, agnostics or non-Christians in the community: should they be forced to accept “the way of Jesus” – and the homeless shelter that apparently comes with it – without any say in the decision or even the process?

* PRMA members are “motivated and determined because [they] look forward to joining with others – both inside and outside the churches – to be part of the solution to the region-wide problem of homelessness.”  Once again, wasn’t this supposed to be addressing the Park Ridge homeless?  The shelter isn’t even open yet and it has become a “region-wide” one?  Isn’t it time the PRMA finally was upfront with us and told us exactly what kind of “solution” it intends to deliver to the people of Park Ridge?  Because it’s sure starting to sound like PRMA’s “solution” will be nothing more than the typical one-night-stand flophouse that the PADS “chain” has been running for years.

* “The Park Ridge PADS initiative is, above all, a ministry of the churches in Park Ridge.”  What kind of religious “ministry” is run by a secular, 501(c)(3) corporation that gets more than a third of its annual revenues from various governments and has no formal religious affiliation of any type?

* PRMA members “welcome a partnership with the city administration and the city as a whole as we together respond to the needs of people in and around our community.”  What kind of “partner” tells its fellow “partner” (i.e., the “City administration”) that the latter’s zoning ordinances are inapplicable?  And what kind of “partner” tells its fellow “partner” (i.e., “the city as a whole”) that the latter’s legitimate concerns and opinions don’t really matter?

* PRMA members “urge and invite the entire Park Ridge community to share [their] vision of the kind of people and city we can be.”  Are we currently not the kind of people, or the kind of city, we should be – simply because we don’t have a PADS shelter?  And if we don’t choose “to share [their] vision,” what justifies them shoving that “vision” down our throats?  

* PRMA members “invite and urge our public officials to see this initiative as laying the groundwork for a healthy new era of cooperation in tackling the social problems that trouble our community.”  Will the hallmark of that “healthy new era” be a group of un-elected clergy dictating to both the government and the citizenry what to do, and how to do it? 

* PRMA members “invite and urge those who remain unconvinced or opposed to a PADS site in Park Ridge to join with [them] in civil and respectful conversation as [they] move forward” with their plans for the PADS site.  By “civil and respectful conversation,” do they mean their telling us that they are going to put in a PADS shelter whether we like it or not?  Does it mean their telling us that they don’t need to comply with the City’s zoning laws by going through the Special Use Permit process? 

* PRMA’s “vision is that Park Ridge would be a community of vitality and caring, prosperity and compassion.”  We’re pretty sure that most residents share that vision, but why is PRMA trying to make it seem as if putting in a PADS shelter to attract the homeless from other communities in this “region” is the only way of achieving it?  And shouldn’t a big part of that “caring” and “compassion” be directed first and foremost to our current taxpaying residents who don’t want a PADS shelter here? 

* PRMA members “realize that [they] haven’t always done the best job in providing timely information to the community” and they “apologize, and…promise to do a better job going forward.”  That sounds a lot like the cynical and increasingly popular (unfortunately) philosophy of “we’d rather ask for forgiveness than for permission” that we get far too often from our politicians and government bureaucrats.  Should it be any more acceptable coming from our clergy? 

We conclude by noting yesterday’s Park Ridge Underground piece on this same topic, which sports a photo of St. Paul of the Cross pastor Fr. Carl Morello doctored to look like Napoleon.  Morello is quoted as saying about opponents of the PADS shelter: “I will listen to them, but they won’t alter my decision to go forward with this.”

That sounds a lot like “hearing but not listening,” Padre.  And if that’s your attitude, why waste their time?