Comments on: Mayor Candidate Challenges Sex Offender Housing

By: J.J.

J.J. — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:28:27 +0000

I love how politicians demonize people because of past mistakes made based solely on opinion. Statistics show that sex offenders living in communities after serving their sentence and completing treatment pose little to no threat to the public. Sexual recidivism rates of sex offenders is the lowest of all offenders and all credible studies show them to be in the 1-4% zone. I am not minimizing their original crime, just their current treatment after paying their debt to society especially since FACT shows that there is no problem with these individuals living in our society.

By: rick

rick — Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:57:36 +0000

Ms Derr
Just a question, where would you suggest would be a “more appropriate” area for warehousing the individuals you and the rest of e “good citizens” of Boise have decided are undesirable? We have seen what the city has done in the past few years with the homeless. There are many rumors as to where and when the city is going to forcible move tent city again. Pointing out a problem without suggesting a viable solution is honestly not doing anyone any good. Although I am fairly sure that there is an ulterior motive for emptying out the old hotel. I would almost bet it has something to do you using that land for more fire traps like the two that have gone up in the past year or so. I wonder if the public/private partnership you speak of would involve The Gardner Co. Maybe the people of Boise should ask Nampa about their experience in that arena.
I agree that Boise as with nearly every other city in this country needs to “man up” and tackle the out of control homeless and drug problems Boise is facing. What I do not understand is your desire to up root these individuals, supposedly move in other more desirable individuals and then and only then build housing for the displaced “dregs”. Wouldn’t a much better plan be to build the new dig’s before displacing individuals who are already housed?

By: L.D.

L.D. — Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:08:03 +0000

… “within easy walking distance…”
This is Boise, everything is within easy walking distance.

By: Foothills Rider

Foothills Rider — Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:40:47 +0000

Agree with Easterner.
Since when is a “veteran” or “refugee” automatically “less fortunate” than a registered sex offender just based on that label? Since when are all in one classification lumped together at all? And heck, what with those refugees “blighting” whatever community they call home per Peavey-Derr, what exactly is she asking? Power to selectively choose who she feels should live where based upon her scale of acceptability? Digging a deeper hole…..

By: Easterner

Easterner — Thu, 15 Oct 2015 03:40:50 +0000

You can’t make this stuff up!
She could be like Toronto’s mayor, Rob Ford.

“They have the right to live where they want”
But, she wants the city to selectively discriminate against someone based on their criminal record despite their “right to live where they want”.

Those affordable studios should be “used for individual such as veterans, the homeless, refugees, and other less fortunate”….

How is that “veterans” gets grouped into the same class as “others less fortunate”? The Governor is a veteran, so he ought to have first choice the city’s palace. He could even walk to the Capital.

And refugees are still less fortunate though in her mind. They could have been killed in their homeland and now they’re living the good life in America, but the mayor-wanna-bee says that’s a “less fortunate” soul.

Like a homeless, registered sex offender.
Or a homeless, veteran, registered sex offender?
Or a refugee, registered sex offender?like a 19 year convicted of sex with his 17 year old girl friend…. that is pretty unfortunate.

I would like to know where in city limits is a place not “withing easy walking distance to a school”– cause that place NEEDS a school.

Okay, a more appropriate place?
How about her high-rise condo building overlooking the park?