The Exit 4 Megashelter Conundrum; “More questions than answers”

As I have become involved in the dispute over the proposed permanent shelter at exit 4 off I84 in Danbury, there are some things that do not pass my “sniff test.”

I understand the plight of the homeless and have engaged my children from very young ages to actively support and be involved in helping those that have fallen on hard times. My opposition to this proposed shelter is it’s location, the lack of transparency, the company tapped to run the facility and manipulative practices of our city government through hiding information with no ramifications or obligation to the local community.
First, the property is located at the foot of the Mill Ridge neighborhood of Lake Avenue. After learning about the use of the facility, the neighbors in Mill Ridge started their own petition and it was summarily disregarded by our city. Subsequent to speaking with some residents living in Mill Ridge, they are now afraid to share their concerns publicly for fear of losing their housing. Afraid to speak because of city retaliation? This is unacceptable.
There are also two schools within the limits of the Danbury residency restriction limiting the proximity and access to schools by registered sex offenders. The former Super 8 motel and Pacific House facility is well within the 2000 feet. Why is the city allowing this?
Danbury has a 20 bed limit in two zones within the city. Why are we trying to turn this into a 172 bed facility when we can’t fill the available beds that already exist and are offered by very well-run local nonprofits? The politics behind this are seedy at best.
The Pacific House is a not for profit organization that buys facilities and transforms them into homeless shelters. They garner government grants and solicit large sums of money from donors. On the surface this looks to be ok. When you look at the public record, they acquired over $4,000,000 in 2020 and spent $2.4000,000 on just salaries. They depreciated over $550,000 in assets and gave away over $500,000 in “contributions and donations” while only spending $150,000 feeding all their residents? Wait, I thought this was a “not for profit”, getting taxpayer dollars to house homeless and help them with training, job placement and finding permanent housing? No, they take taxpayer funds along with their annual Gala positioned to solicit additional donations to fund salaries, not to focus on recovery. This year's Gala will be held virtually due to the ongoing pandemic to raise an additional $200,000.
The Pacific House receives payment per person, per night that stays in their facilities, beyond the grants and donations mentioned above.

501C3 status requires no federal or state tax burden. Many youth travel sports teams and clubs are legitimately 501C3 organizations for example, as are churches. According to Google there are 1.6 million tax-exempt organizations in the United States All non tax paying entities. There is a caveat: they can’t exceed $5,000,000 in revenue or the categorization of the 501C status changes and so does the law for the tax burden.

As for Danbury, our mayor and our police chief went on record last week saying that there has been no increase in crime of effect on city resources. If you look at the records submitted by the police chief it will show this. The local neighborhoods see a different reality daily, and through monitoring of calls, shared with the Zoning Commission a small sample of the calls being responded to by our local first responders. These calls somehow do not exist on the police public records. We have spoken to dozens of first responders, police and fire who have all relayed that this location has seen an increase in police and medical calls - in and around the facility’s address. A local neighbor was also told that the police were informed not to use sirens or lights going into the facility, and that police reports are being changed and recategorized for the public record. We’ve not been told otherwise, and continue to view reports that don’t accurately depict the service calls being made for this area.

When the mayor spoke at last week’s public hearing on the matter, he indicated that if anyone’s compassion didn’t align with the city’s mission to make this shelter permanent, we were not following our Christian obligations. Many of us - if not all - on the call were deeply offended because this is not about helping those who genuinely need it in our community. We simply want transparency and the opportunity to properly vet this location, the managing company and have adequate research done before making a permanent decision.

What was not mentioned on the call were the two deaths from drug overdoses that had happened within the week of the public hearing. One woman was found within the Pacific House facility and another overdose death was discovered by a local business manager further down the road behind a local restaurant. Neither appear on the records, nor are covered by local news outlets. So I have to ask myself why? Why do the mayor and the police chief soil their reputations, the city’s reputation while lying to us? Why would a Police Chief put his officers in harm's way with the zero sirens and flashing light guidance? Who is applying the pressure on these officials and making them the political sacrificial lambs as it all comes unraveled?

It does not make any sense. This should not have been silently started and then pushed through for Zoning commission recommendation. This should have been a referendum on the November Ballot.

There are way too many questions and zero answers from the city or the state.
Finally, as a resident of Danbury and a person that cares about this amazing multicultural community, I have to stand up and fight for the safety of the children, families and the local businesses in the area. The increased amount of crime should not impact the safety and sanctity of our elderly, children, homes, and our families. There are alternatives to this location in Danbury. We urge the commission to deny the zoning change application, and talk to the community in an open, transparent and legal process that will meet the needs of the city of Danbury, the surrounding community, and the residents of the proposed shelter. For those wanting to stay updated on this topic, visit www.pocdanbury.org or, if you are also concerned and wish to have a formal review of this prior to making the megashelter permanent, please sign https://www.change.org/p/mayor-joseph-cavo-keep-danbury-s-children-safe-7d439377-0849-44b4-97f8-3c1a7b1291c9.

Thank you
Jeff Berlant
Resident of Danbury