MEMO BLOG Memo Calendar Memo Pad Business Memos Loaves & Fishes Letters Home
FEATURE ARTICLES
Prescott parent leads mural effort
Sex offenders group home offends neighbors
Refectory rocks, collects food for needy
Glenhaven dog park access an issue
Bixby outlines history of East Portland Neighborhood Office
Your East Portland Neighborhood Office — ready to serve
More inside line on EPNO history, direction
East Portland Neighborhood Grants awarded
Clarification
Correction
Monthly quote

About the MEMO
MEMO Archives
MEMO Advertising
MEMO Country (Map)
MEMO Web Neighbors
MEMO Staff
MEMO BLOG

© 2006 Mid-county MEMO
Terms & Conditions
Sex offenders group home offends neighbors

LEE PERLMAN
THE MID-COUNTY MEMO

In their backyard are 10-year-old Noah with his mom Mary Kerchal. Noah used his backyard often until a training center for recovering sex offenders and pedophiles moved into the house on the other side of the fence recently.
MEMO PHOTO: TIM CURRAN
Since 1998 Mary Kerchal has lived in a house on Northeast 103rd Avenue that her family used to rent out. She has found it to be more than satisfactory until an incident a few weeks ago.

A neighbor couple took their three-year-old for a walk on Northeast 102nd Avenue. As they passed by Number 330, their three-year-old wandered into the driveway. A group of adults materialized and put up a human wall to block the child’s progress. One woman explained that the house contained a group of men, some of who were pedophiles and recovering sex offenders.

330 N.E. 102nd Ave. abuts Kerchal’s back yard, separated by a broken-down fence.

Kerchal contacted the owner, chiropractor Dr. Larry Berntsen. He told her he had rented the house to Development Systems, Inc., a care provider, on a long-term lease. Only later did he become aware of the population who would be using the facility, he said.

“He feels kind of stuck,” Kerchal said. “If he were to try to break the lease, he could be sued.”

Kerchal felt the location was an inappropriate place for such a facility, given the large number of children who live in proximity to it. She expressed her fears to Donald Acker, director of DSI. His answer, she said, was, “I’m sorry you don’t want us here, but this is a good facility for us, and it’s completely legal.” The company’s clients receive training there, and they are escorted to and from the facility. Acker offered to repair the fence that separates his property from Kerchal’s. He also said that there are other sex offenders living in the neighborhood that neighbors don’t know about.

Acker told the Memo the system deals with developmentally disabled adults. Some are under court supervision, but none have been convicted of crimes. They are under supervision at all times while visiting the 102nd Avenue facility. Acker said he was not aware of being in violation of any city code requirements, but if they were they could bring themselves into compliance easily.

Eric King of the Portland Office of Neighborhood Involvement, who has dealt with policy issues relating to social service facilities in neighborhoods, told the Memo that he was not aware that there was a treatment facility at this address. If the agency’s clients lived there, he said, it would be a group living situation for which they would need a conditional use. However, DSI has every right to operate a training facility at this location.

A representative of the City Bureau of Development Services confirmed this, but also said there may be an irregularity in other ways. To change from the residence it once was to institutional use would require a Change of Use process, and there is some doubt that DSI has gone through this.

Another issue is that the property is zoned CM, a relatively seldom-used designation. By rights, commercial uses are allowed in under this designation, but at least 50 percent of the space must be devoted to residential use. A representative of DSI contacted by the Memo claimed that this requirement is met because the house “has a kitchen and bathroom,” even though no one lives there.

Meanwhile, Kerchal is not at all comfortable with the situation. “When the men come into their backyard, I don’t feel comfortable being in mine,” she told the Memo. “I can see from my back window into their house, which means they can see into mine. I feel encroached upon. I’m concerned that one of these men may look across the way and see my cute little ten-year-old son. Yes, I’m told they’re under supervision at all times, but what if they were to come back some day when they’re not under supervision? (Acker said this is ‘statistically very unlikely.’) If I moved out and tried to sell or rent this house, I’d have to disclose what’s next to it, and that would affect me financially.”
Memo Calendar | Memo Pad | Business Memos | Loaves & Fishes | Letters | About the MEMO
MEMO Advertising | MEMO Archives | MEMO Web Neighbors | MEMO Staff | Home