203 replies to this topic

[Orangetj]

It's simply the most appropriate area for the project. That's the bottom line...

What makes it the most appropriate area?

[mylo]

What makes it the most appropriate area?

Because the developers paid their way out of leaving usable lots for low income housing in their fancy new planned communities.

I hear this is the most appropriate area, because no other areas are available.

[Chad Vander Veen]

What makes it the most appropriate area?

Probably because it's where Duke doesn't live, I wager.

[Duke]

Because the developers paid their way out of leaving usable lots for low income housing in their fancy new planned communities.

I hear this is the most appropriate area, because no other areas are available.

That's my take on it. The selection of available property to accommodate these projects is somewhat limited. And, the obvious enthusiasm by the project sponsors/supporters for the proposed location is certainly compelling.

[EDF]

Hey folks...

Any body read this article...

Project backers oppose site shift
http://www.sacbee.co...ory/121456.html

Well I read it... and these goo goo types make me sick... the alternative site proposed would be next to the Mercy Hospital... but oh no... the proponents don't want it to be in an "institutional setting"....

Well you know what... how about putting it next to the proponents house and see if he wants his "clients" running around staring at the moon and sun in the middle of the day...

I mean if they have to be put in a setting like this kind of an aparment complex why not locate it there... there is a nice bike/hiking trail close by... some parks down the street along with open space... and of course there are other apartments along this street...and we'll even through in a Pete's Coffee house..

how good can it get... they can also hang out there down by the old Sizzler and the Jack in the Box at Bidwell and Blue Ravine...

I dont' get it... am I way off the mark here..? or am I getting the feeling this guy just wants it in the old town section no matter what...because that's just his STINKING PREFERENCE.... even if he's given a decent alternative...how big a deal is it for him to put the same stinking building on a different site...? shouldn't cost that much to keep the peace in the community... don't you think...?

somebody get back to me on this one....

excuse me now while I go watch Barak Obama-babe announce that he's running for Presidente

[SandPebble]

Residents of Royal Oaks and surrounding areas are signing petitions. What is the latest with this situation?

[quote name='EDF' date='Feb 10 2007, 08:07 AM' post='145517']

I dont' get it... am I way off the mark here..? or am I getting the feeling this guy just wants it in the old town section no matter what...because that's just his STINKING PREFERENCE.... even if he's given a decent alternative...how big a deal is it for him to put the same stinking building on a different site...? shouldn't cost that much to keep the peace in the community... don't you think...?
somebody get back to me on this one....

[Terry]

Hey folks...

Any body read this article...

Project backers oppose site shift
http://www.sacbee.co...ory/121456.html


I dont' get it... am I way off the mark here..? or am I getting the feeling this guy just wants it in the old town section no matter what...because that's just his STINKING PREFERENCE.... even if he's given a decent alternative...how big a deal is it for him to put the same stinking building on a different site...? shouldn't cost that much to keep the peace in the community... don't you think...?

somebody get back to me on this one....

I think it may have to do with the historic and central areas being eligible for Redevelopment Funds from the City, whereas the other, newer areas are not.

[SandPebble]

I just was given a letter regarding this info re psychatric housing:

19 apartments
3 stories high
no monitoring on site to ensure medications taken
drastically more cars and traffic
The neighborhood has done its fair share
less than 1/4 mile from Sutter Middle school, near Judah etc
FINAL vote of the city council is FEB 27 2007 at 6pm at CITY HALL. This is the last time to be heard.

The owner of the property is trying to switch the zoning to multi family and it is not that currently.

He, the owner, is going to open a cut thru so that the neighborhoods of Cobble Ridge, Royal Oaks, Espree, behind old Food Source and historic will be used as a go between.


There is more but they say please attend as they say it is the only way the council will listen. The planning commision had voted no.

[np1518]

Where can we sign the petition to prevent this from happening? Is there somebody to call or who do we get in touch with? I will definitely be at that meeting! I urge everyone in this neighborhood to take action!

[Suzyque565]

It's been awhile since I've heard the final word on this project.. is it cancelled or just on the back burner of City discussions?

[np1518]

We actually attended the city council meeting on Feb. 27, but this issue was moved to the following meeting. I found the notes on this fourm, http://www.tomatopag...showtopic=12002, and it looks like the issue was moved again, to the April 10th meeting. If anyone has any info, I would appreciate it.

[FolsomRider]

"how about putting it next to the proponents house and see if he wants his "clients" running around staring at the moon and sun in the middle of the day..."

That statement is as cold as one can get.

"No on-site monitoring of mediations"? Again, it sounds like no clue in this statement...

Has anyone even looked into how this kind of housing works? What good it provides? I challenge one person in this thread to post, in detail and from documented fact, exactly how tenants will be housed, how they will be chosen for this housing, what monitoring they will have (if any is needed), proven statistics about the crime rates in areas local to this form of housing. Why not use a town with similar demographics as an example...

Has Folsom become so uptight that it has taken a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) method of hiding from society? Oh Yeah, that's why everyone moved here. To get away from all of the reality that was in their backyards elsewhere. No, "We're too good for it."

I am ashamed of this thread as it shows some of the blatant bigotry that is driving modern society into the ground. This kind of prejudice makes me sick. Has anyone considered that statistics show that you probably live real close to a seriously mentally ill person... How about a sexual offender? According to the National Institute for Mental Health, "an estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder". That would be almost 15,000 in Folsom... How about the fact that about 6 percent suffer from a serious mental illness.... Looking at an approximate population of 60,000, that would mean about 3500 seriously mentally ill persons within Folsom alone. There is a real good chance that you drive by many homes that already house mentally ill people every day, you just don't know it or won't admit it. And there's a real good chance that one of the people in the cubicles near you at work has a family member who is mentally ill and you are, unknowingly, discriminating against them.

Seeing as though it is considered "housing for to 18 families with an adult member who suffers from mental illness," or are we, in Folsom, too good for this, so high and mighty and narcissistic that we'd shove our own flesh and blood in the closet to avoid reality. I don't care if this is halfway housing for mentally ill, they still have managed the achievements required for society to deem them capable of living outside the walls of a locked psych ward. Bias towards them is prejudice and a direct violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. I'd love to see a decent civil rights attorney (okay maybe a little bit on the money grubbing side) take side with the possible tenants of said housing and file a class action lawsuit.

What caught me about this thread? I'm a middle-aged psych major, know from experience that people diagnosed as mentally ill can be some of the best citizens and hardest workers (unlike many bigots), and look forward to seeing that people with these forms of illnesses obtain the best treatment possible.

Lets get a clue and try to fix a major problem facing society and not add to it by trying to bury it. Sorry for the rant, but after reading this thread, I want to take a shower with a pumice stone to wipe the slime off...

[Suzyque565]

Has anyone even looked into how this kind of housing works? What good it provides? I challenge one person in this thread to post, in detail and from documented fact, exactly how tenants will be housed, how they will be chosen for this housing, what monitoring they will have (if any is needed), proven statistics about the crime rates in areas local to this form of housing. Why not use a town with similar demographics as an example...

I'm actually glad that you mentioned this challenge because the questions that we have wanted answered all along are your "statements". No one does say how tenants will be housed, how they will be chosen, monitoring, etc. All we seem to hear is that there will be housing, which would be located between a middle school and a established day care center. I do not believe any of use are talking race, bigotry, etc. We do want answers when it's regarding the safety of our neighbors and children. Perhaps you can give us answers on how these programs work instead of judging us.

[Orangetj]

Bias towards them is prejudice and a direct violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

False. There is nothing illegal about holding a bias/prejudice against any group of people. It only becomes a "direct violation" when such a bias is the predominant reason for denying openly available employment or housing opportunities to members of the protected class. Since it doesn't appear that anybody posting here owns the property in question, none of them have the ability to deny these people housing.

There's nothing illegal about questioning the merit of a housing project such as the one that is the subject of this discussion. Nor is there anything illegal about not wanting a concentration of mentally ill people near a school and a daycare facility. Whether the concerns of the posters on this site are reasonable or well-founded is obviously up for debate, but the legality of their concerns should not be in question.

[Orangetj]

According to the National Institute for Mental Health, "an estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder". That would be almost 15,000 in Folsom... How about the fact that about 6 percent suffer from a serious mental illness.... Looking at an approximate population of 60,000, that would mean about 3500 seriously mentally ill persons within Folsom alone.

Interesting stats, to be sure. I do think that many of us forget that seriously mentally ill people are here already and are out walking and working among everybody else.