Monday, June 13, 2016

The City Council Will Look At The Sober Living - Group Homes Issue Tomorrow Evening

I wouldn't get too excited about this if I were you. People with drug and alcohol addictions are considered disabled under various state and federal laws, and therefore are a special class of folks with all sorts of legally guaranteed protections. Cities have to tread quite lightly when dealing with sober houses or group homes because they are often home to some of these big government shielded folks.

You, on the other hand, are not all that special and therefore are not quite so protected. If anything you are an oppressor class and must be carefully monitored by the government.

There are various classifications for "group homes" and "sober living facilities," and you can read all about them in the City Council meeting agenda report by clicking here. The following deals with "licensed group homes."


The message that is coming through here rather loud and clear here is that there isn't much that the City Council can do about any of this. And should they attempt any actions deemed inappropriate under bigger government laws dealing with the rights of this protected class of disabled folks, the city could get into a peck of expensive trouble.

However, they can write a letter in support of some new Sacramento legislation dealing with this situation. It is legislation that kind of nibbles at the edges of the public's concerns about the issue. And that is what is being proposed for Tuesday evening's discussion of this sensitive matter.


That's all there is. Sierra Madre's City Council is a bit player in this drama, and cannot do all that much. Their options are extremely limited. And while this isn't exactly no action whatsoever, it is also not a whole lot, either.

Sometimes the appearance of doing something is their best available option.

Interesting comment from a few days ago
(Mod: The following comment was added to a much older topic last week, and I doubt many saw it. I thought I'd include it here.)

My relative is a "Patient" at Dedicato. The entire coarse of treatment has been a "Holistic Joke"....a joke that costs $15,000.00 per month. Furthermore....our family lives 2000 plus miles from Sierra Madre.

We have had serious doubts regarding the legitimacy of this facility. After reading the article in the Sierra Madre Tattler, we feel our concerns have been validated.

We have searched for licensing, educational & personal background information on the staff. Thanks to the information discovered in The Tattler article, we have clear direction & information to continue this search.

Our research has also revealed that many "Treatment" centers in California operate in rental homes & buildings. This would appear to be a very lucrative situation for all involved: Center Directors; Center Physicians; Property Managers & Property Owners.

Most private insurance DOES NOT cover "Sober Living". In our situation, insurance was finished after the initial 90 days of Rehab...in a licensed facility, attached to a major medical center, with a staff of 6 Licensed Physicians with Addictionologist credentials.

We have spoken directly with the director and are very concerned about client safety & treatment modalities used. We are not sure what our recourse will ultimately be. However, this "Sober Living Facility" needs to be looked at...

sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

46 comments:

  1. All I can say is that for all those bleeding heart liberals who are in favor of all these laws and vote for all those democratic candidates, just wait until one of these group homes moves in next door to you. You might change your tune. Group homes, no matter the size, are commercial businesses and do not belong in residential R-1 zoned neighborhoods. If one moves in next door to you, not only will you have to be concerned about the potential criminal history of some of the residents, if you were ever to sell your home, you would have to disclose the existence of such a facility to potential buyers. There will then be one of two consequences. Either your home will become unsalable (Would you buy a home next door to a group home with drug addicts?) or your home will be reduced in value by hundreds of thousands of dollars. How does that old saying go? A conservative is a liberal mugged by reality.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The heavy hand of big government falls upon little Sierra Madre.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a nationwide problem, and I get it that the intention has been to, once again, do something about the drug wars. There may be some hope when the addiction gene is identified, or whatever it is that makes people slowly kill themselves with drugs or alcohol, something like this new injectable treatment for opiod addicts. That would be a real loss for hustlers like those at the Dedicato. As for now, these centers are the solution our society has come up with. Okay, put them in zones ready for them.

      Delete
    2. Things like Oxycontin created a huge appetite for opiods in this country. Addiction rates are through the roof. If the Feds hadn't approved synthetics for legal public consumption none of this would have happened. It was only a matter of time before street drugs like heroin became an epidemic. Now we're supposed to accommodate the consequences of bad govt policy.

      Delete
    3. I take issue with someone who drinks or takes drugs being classified as someone with a genuine disability, like Down Syndrome.
      They are not the same thing.

      Delete
    4. 1:19
      Some babies are born with an addiction. Do you take issues with these, too?

      Delete
    5. 1:16
      It is actually the marketing of these drugs that made all the difference. Capitalism at its finest...

      Delete
    6. 8:27, are addicted babies being treated in rehab businesses like Dedicato?

      Delete
  3. We live in a backwards community thanks to our city council

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What?? So it's our City Council's fault the sober living house is next door to Rachelle? No sense just another attack on the council.

      Delete
    2. You might be over reacting. The problem is state and federal law has made this city council completely poserless to do anything. Just like all those other city councils in California.

      Delete
    3. I disagree Mod that we are powerless. In fact, I think we are the power behind the throne. It's a drag, it's a chore, and it's a bore, but it's citizens organizing that will bring about change.

      Delete
    4. It is a bigger throne, though. Washington DC. And even if the City Council isn't powerless in this case, do you really expect them to take a chance and lift a finger?

      Delete
    5. Would love to hear your suggestions on what the City Council should do besides sending a letter to Sacramento and Washington.

      Delete
    6. Quit being pushed around by the City Manager and City Attorney and actually lead. That is what they were elected to do.

      Delete
    7. I have some suggestion 1:37.
      1) Form a council sub committee of 2 or 3 to take the problem on
      2) Get a staff member to produce research
      3) Contact the councils of all the other cities that are protesting, and find out what is effective
      4) Lobby the League of Cities
      5) Drag SCAG into it
      6) Contact the financial well being consortium, or whatever the business community organizations are called, and get them actively involved

      That'll do for a start.

      Delete
    8. Is it possible that our very, very expensive city attorney could participate?

      Delete
    9. Her job is to keep City Councilmembers in their box.

      Delete
  4. I have information on athens disposal they have been using Remote neural monitoring surveillance and no touch torture on me and city council members to obtain city contracts and I have proof and wittiness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need to speak out about this at the City Council meeting. Not just once, either. You should bring this up at every public comment opportunity.

      Delete
    2. Please explain "no touch torture". And did you use the foil on your antenna to get the remote surveillance?

      Delete
    3. The no touch torture is odor transmitted.

      Delete
    4. Just clothe yourself in aluminum foil. That'll do it.

      Delete
    5. Not this weekend. It is going to be in the 100s. You will bake like a spud.

      Delete
  5. True, it's a small move, but the council damn well better send the letter. And then they need to connect with everyone they know through and in the League of Cities, and any other larger organizations. The business of drug rehab needs to take place in the business districts. Safer for all concerned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 473 cities have supported the League of Cities Resolution.
      So are we already in that, or are we 474?

      Delete
    2. Yes, it's better for businesses to be in business zones. Close to transportation, restaurants, populated areas. Sticking these things into R1 areas doesn't do anyone any good, except for those bringing in the profits. At the cost of their neighbors.

      Delete
    3. In the populated areas there would be even more people at risk!

      Delete
    4. 12:06, there are more people around to control behaviors, closer police presence, and are you really suggesting the patients are dangerous, so put them someplace where people are less protected?

      Delete
    5. The ideal place for any drug rehab type things is next door to city halls.
      If a city allows the state and the Feds to force them into having these things, and the cities can't figure out how to modify the demand so it doesn't hurt the families that support the whole municipal structure, fine. Put the Facilities in the city hall parking lot.

      Delete
    6. Great idea. That way the police are right there to supervise.

      Delete
  6. Mod, there's a great write up on the recent Assembly activity in the Malibu Times, from April 29, 2016:
    http://www.malibutimes.com/news/article_7c4298e0-0d8c-11e6-91a2-eb7c334897ea.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11:36, very interesting. If the Malibu city attorney did such wonderful work, can't our city attorney offer some help & insight? She's a smart person. I bet she could help.

      Delete
    2. Our city needs to bond with others. Eventually there will be enough pressure to force the assembly to demand regulation and zoning requirements.

      Delete
    3. 11:57
      Our cities do not even bond with their own residents. It is unlikely that they will bond with others.

      Delete
  7. That is a heart breaking comment from the relative of the 'disabled' person at Dedicato. What they are going throu is very rough.
    Unfortunately, these 'treatments' are often ineffective. I have a relative who has never gotten better, despite hundreds of thousands of dollars of treatment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even good doctors fail sometimes.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. And sometimes unscrupulous operators just take the money.

      Delete
    4. How about the only successful treatment we have ever found, AA and NA?
      Not interested because they are free and they actually work sometimes?

      Delete
    5. the city would only be concerned if their retirement benefits were affected.

      Delete
    6. They get interested when there is money in it. There is no money in protecting resident rights.

      Delete
  8. This new enterprise of sober & drug rehab houses and facilities could be a real cash cow for tax hungry Sierra Madre, California city hall to catch. A special security tax could be passed for these houses or facilities and this could supply money to keep the SMPD in pay checks?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The cities that allow this should start paying the homeowners around these places what they are losing in property values.
      And the state needs to adjust property taxes accordingly.

      Delete
  9. Email the council members and tell them that you don't want to have a drug rehab move in next door.
    Unless of course you do want to have a drug rehab next door. As it is now, everywhere is fair game, unless you're a few houses too close to one that exists anyway.

    rarizmendi@cityofsierramadre.com
    JCapoccia@cityofsierramadre.com
    ddelmar@cityofsierramadre.com
    ggoss@cityofsierramadre.com
    JHarabedian@cityofsierramadre.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they cannot stop sober houses in Sierra Madre then they are no good.

      Delete