Letters: Readers discuss youth justice, Trump’s foul mouth and landlords’ rights

Real Kansas justice

As a young person who has experienced our broken youth justice system, I know the answer to the problems facing Kansas’ foster system is not locking up more kids. Passing the youth justice reform package in 2017 was a good thing. Reopening youth prisons is not going to make anything better.

If Kansas wants to do better by its young people, it should invest in them. We know young people thrive in loving homes, and it’s important that the juvenile justice and foster care systems receive more financial investment.

Our state already has much higher youth incarceration rates compared with other states, but the Legislature passing youth justice reforms was a step in the right direction. Since then, Kansas has made plenty of progress: Youth detention has fallen by nearly 30%. Larned Juvenile Correctional Facility has closed, and the number of youth in group homes has declined by almost 70%.

Moving forward, Kansas policymakers should increase support to crucial youth justice programs that prioritize rehabilitation, such as restorative justice, housing, counseling and jobs programs. Now is not the time to turn back, but to press forward for a better future.

- Ado’Nijah Metcalf, Wichita, Kansas

Waldo memories

Long ago, there was a replica of a Christmas wonderland inside the Waldo Ice House. Storefront houses lined what looked like an outdoor street. The Christmas decorations were beautiful, with trees lining the mock street. The main attraction was a display of dozens of antique toys owned by a local businessman, whose name I have forgotten.

I took my children for several years. It is a lovely memory. I’m so disappointed the building will not be saved from the wrecker’s ball when a new structure is built. (Dec. 1, 4A, “Multistory apartments headed to former Waldo antique spot”)

- Mary Keyes, Prairie Village

Landlord needs

Agreed, Kansas City renters have lawful and well-documented rights to suitable housing. But upon a literal reading of the proposed new tenant’s bill of rights, taken up this week by the Special Committee on Housing Policy (and available on the city clerk’s website), one will likely come away with serious concerns about possible consequences:

▪ Hampering a housing provider’s ability to adhere to lawful, consistent criteria for selecting people to rent to.

▪ Restricting the housing provider’s ability to protect the integrity of the property, as well as the security of neighbors.

▪ Imposing new expenses that could result in higher rents, which is antithetical to seeking solutions to the housing-affordability crisis.

▪ Creating subjective housing standards that are effectively unfunded mandates.

▪ Discouraging reinvestment in our existing rental housing stock, and worse yet, exacerbating an environment that is already seeing many housing providers divest by selling to absentee landlords or to convert affordable rental properties to owner-occupied homes.

▪ Leaving Kansas City as an island within a region that offers many more attractive economic development options, including affordable rental housing.

Please read the proposal and decide for yourself.

- Sam Alpert, Executive vice president, Heartland Apartment Association, Kansas City

Foul words

I heard our president at a recent campaign rally in Florida. He again used vulgar language to rally the troops. It seems to me to be unbecoming of the presidency to use such language, and in front of children no less.

I have always thought of the office of the president as something to be revered and honored. His behavior cheapens the office to the people around the world who see this. I hope he refrains from further staining the office.

- Barry Katz, Overland Park

Better renaming

I was born and raised in Kansas City. I moved away a number of times but always came back because this area is home. I very much want Martin Luther King Jr. to be honored here. I don’t want it to be at the expense of changing beloved, iconic street names so we end up a cookie-cutter copy of every other city in the country.

Wouldn’t we rather see King honored in another way? Does it have to be a street? Couldn’t we instead change the name of a place that is well loved and designated for the use of the city’s residents?

I propose Swope Park be renamed and dedicated as the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Park. The land was originally donated in 1896 by honorary “Colonel” Thomas H. Swope. He would continue to be memorialized with the existing Thomas H. Swope Memorial, where he is buried in a columned structure overlooking the park.

- Candace Stafford-Whitman, Shawnee