Friday, August 19, 2011

The E. Montecito Homeless Shelter: If You Build It, They Will Come

The matter of possible homeless housing on E. Montecito was raised yesterday, and people responded on this blog with quite a few comments. And some expressed considerable disbelief. How can it be that a City with fewer than 5 officially designated homeless persons should have to build a homeless shelter being the question. But what you need to understand here is that this is the glorious era of regional government. Remember Joe Mosca telling us that he doesn't just represent Sierra Madre, but many other cities as well? This is a part of that. Cities banding together to help each other is how he put it. With homeless housing in Sierra Madre being an unfortunate consequence.

The San Gabriel Valley COG is involved (the reason being grant money, they don't do anything if there isn't any grant money), Sacramento has passed a bill (SB 2), and because of this our illustrious "Housing Element" consultant Karen Warner stood before the City Council and said that we have no choice but to plan for building what she so artfully termed "support housing." In other words, we need to throw open our doors and welcome the San Gabriel Valley's homeless troubles onto our streets.

Here is how SB 2 is explained on a state website. What it lays down for every City in the State of California is not the best news for us:

This bill requires cities and counties to identify specific sites with by-right zoning to accommodate the community's need for homeless shelters, requires cities and counties to identify zones where special needs facilities and transitional housing are permitted either by right or with a conditional use permit, and prohibits a city or county from disapproving applications for shelters and special needs facilities unless specified findings are made.

Diversionary euphemisms like "special needs facilities" and "transitional housing" aside, what this law states is that we have to plan for homeless housing in Sierra Madre. And because of this, anyone wanting to build such a thing in our town can, once it is in our "Housing Element" (and General Plan), do so. There would be little that could be done. Or so we are told. After all, there is plenty of Federal and State grant money out there to make such a thing rewarding to the interested developer. Why do you think the SGVCOG is involved?

So where would all these homeless people come from? Our homeless housing is going to need clients, after all. Right? But remember, we're talking regional government here, not just Sierra Madre. Cities working together with other cities to help solve all of our problems together. Just like Joe so happily said they should.

In an August 8 Pasadena Star News article entitled "Pasadena counts homeless in effort to house unsheltered," reporter Brian Charles laid it out this way:

Before the sun rose Monday, a small army of volunteers set out in Pasadena to count, record and collect data on the city's homeless population. The weeklong census, backed by the City of Pasadena's Housing Department and joined by area nonprofits will serve as both a data gathering effort and a mechanism to trigger the spending of federal dollars to help the more than 1,200 homeless in Pasadena.

The article does not specify where those federal dollars would be spent, but I do not think it is entirely inconceivable that some of that money could be used to help fund an East Montecito homeless shelter should some developer decide that would be worth his while. And since accommodations for this would have been included in our City Housing Element, it could easily be made to happen.

At the end of his article on Pasadena's homeless problems, Brian Charles supplied a breakdown of exactly what that city is facing:

Total Homeless: 1,216 - 1,148 adults (874 men, 75 percent; 274 women, 25 percent)

Ethnic Breakdown: 35 percent Black, 29 percent white non-Hispanic, 25 percent Hispanic/Latino, 5 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, 2 percent Native American, 4 percent other

Marital Status: 91 percent single

Sheltered/Unsheltered: 976 unsheltered (on the streets or in the Bad Weather Shelter program), 240 sheltered (in homeless programs, i.e. emergency or transitional housing)

The matter of whether Sierra Madre has a homeless problem or not is, unfortunately, moot. If we allow for the building of a homeless shelter in Sierra Madre, then we will have a homeless problem just like our very large neighbor to the west. As a matter of fact, it will become one and the same. There are plenty of homeless people in Pasadena alone to fill it, and then some. And we haven't even begun to consider all the other cities in the area.

As our homeless housing would have been built by a developer using state and federal dollars, the City of Sierra Madre would have no control over who would live there. I personally suspect Pasadena would gladly bus over as many homeless as the E. Montecito shelter could hold. Their shelters already being filled beyond capacity, and with plenty more knocking on the door.

And then there is this question. If a person is homeless, how exactly do you determine where he lives, and therefore what City he comes from? Ponder that if you have a couple of free hours.

Here is something I've been wanting to say for a while now. Too often we hear from our elected officials and City employees that in situations such as this there is nothing they can do about it. We've heard it repeatedly with RHNA numbers, and you can bet the Chevy that you will hear it just as often in regards to planning for homeless housing on E. Montecito. All they have seemed willing to do is throw up their hands and, no matter how badly the people actually paying the bills here are against it, do the state's bidding instead.

Picture this. Our downtown is a pretty great place. Home of sidewalk dining, some fine restaurants, shops and other places of interest. It is also where stroller moms go to take their babies for a walk, and where we send our children on their bikes to meet with their friends and load up on Jolly Ranchers and frozen yogurt. It is a place as timeless as it is pristine. A throwback to another time, and an imortant part of the reason why many of us live here. It is that better place we all worked to find.

Now throw into the mix homeless housing and what that would mean to Sierra Madre's downtown. Despite the myths and guilt trips, the homeless are not merely people who are down on their luck and in need of a helping hand. There are those for certain, but is that the rule? Not in the real world. Rather a very large percentage of the homeless are either subject to uncontrollable addictions and/or mental health disorders. This from an article entitled "A National Shame: The Mentally Ill Homeless" (click here).

One of our nation's greatest shames is the number of homeless people adrift in the streets and parks of our cities. And of the estimated 744,000 people who are homeless on any given night, 40 to 45 percent of them have a serious mental illness. Most of these mentally ill people go untreated, and unable to work, live a hand-to-mouth existence out on the streets.

An estimated 40 to 45 percent of homeless persons suffer from Axis I mental disorders in a given year, which include anxiety disorders, bipolar disorder, clinical depression, and severe personality disorders. Between 150,000 and 200,000 of the homeless have schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

Substance use is also prevalent among homeless populations. In a 1996 survey, 46 percent of the homeless respondents had an alcohol use problem during the past year, and 62 percent had an alcohol use problem at some point in their lifetime. Thirty-eight percent had a problem with drug use during their past year, and 58 percent had a drug use problem during their lifetime.

What Sierra Madre needs is something more than a City government that, having concluded that there is nothing they can do, does nothing. The people we put in office, or pay to run our City's affairs, should feel obligated from time to time to do what it is that we actually want from them. And if we don't want homeless housing just around the corner from our downtown, or on E. Montecito for that matter, then we should expect those who represent us to fight for that.

But if all we get is the usual "there is nothing we can do about it" rhythm and blues? Then these people should either be relieved of their offices or, where appropriate, fired. And then replaced with people who will find a way to fight for something that is so very integral to the needs and desires of the people of this City.

I don't see how we really have much of a choice.

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

71 comments:

  1. Did Elaine Aguilar in fact make the comment claimed by Tayrn Hildreth or was Taryn Hildreth just throwing dirt at Elaine because of the Hildreth's legal mess with the city?

    ReplyDelete
  2. How about Pasadena's neighbor to the south, San Marino, and South Pasadena? any homeless shelters there?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I propose that in the stead of a "homeless shelter", would not a "home for teenage mothers" be the more focused solution for our fair city. My humble opinion is that the city renovate the Old Church, and allow Covenant House to use the building free of charge.
    This will give them the housing the city so deires, and help young girls through a turbulent time.
    Just an idea.
    http://www.covenanthouse.org/youth-homeless-programs/mother-child-teen-pregnancy

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Hildreth's property is now in receivership.
    If the city obtains the property through this process, will their property become the site of the homeless shelter? The dug out hole under the house could hold several beds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good questions 7:42, and also where is the La Canada homeless shelter located?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon 7:33
    Tayrn is an honest person, I am shocked and dismayed at the accusatory nature of your comment.
    Neuroblast Films

    ReplyDelete
  7. Homeless shelters need to have services available to help these people. They come with medical and mental disabilities, not to mention those with out of control substance abuse.
    You don't just plunk them down in a community like the corner 7-11.
    They should be close to where they can get social services provided by city and state facilities equipped to handle special needs.
    This is as stupid as it gets.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Elaine was just being honest when she said the homeless shelter on Montecito was probably going to happen. This has been in the works for long time. Ever since Karen Warner broke the news back in June of 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If that is so, then which of the property owners will be greedy enough to sell out their friends, neighbors, and community? Rumor has it the Child's property has sold and the family is leaving the area. Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The Hildreths property is NOT in receivership, somebody is spreading lies here. I have read every correspondence to and from the city and the firm they have hired to handle the case. Yes the city has attempted to put the Hildrets home into recievership, but they were ordered by Honorable Judge Simpson to meet and discuss options going forward to avoid court. The city used this time to inundate the Hildreths with a mountian of repeat paperwork (a refiling of the recievership motion), and by doing so the city has helped the Hildreths prove the city is abusing their power, and the legal system to try and ramrod an illegal motion. This second attempt is a complete waste of the courts time, because the "court ordered meeting" has not happened between the Hildreths and the city due to the city not responding in the affirmative to repeated requests by the Hildreths via fax, phone, and email to have said meeting. The date to return back to court is just a few days away. The Hildreths are excited, and so is their team. When it hits,... it may break the fan!
    Neuroblast Films

    ReplyDelete
  11. The number of homeless in Sierra Madre?
    I know of 3.
    The guy who lives behind the reservoir and walks to the library every day, the guy with a dog or two who pushes a shopping cart through town now and again (have also seen him in Pasadena and Arcadia) and a guy in the canyon who sleeps in cars.
    So where did the "5" come from?
    And the 2, sometimes 3 we actually have are not looking for a homeless shelter.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Neuroblats's idea to help young mothers and set up a facility in the old church is a great one - it's a win-win. So probably won't go far in city hall.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are plenty of property owners on that block including the fire chief whose building dreams went up in smoke when Measure V passed. There may be one willing to screw the city.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If the Hildreth's home is not in receivership I am glad. That being said, then Mr. Hildreth needs to stop telling his neighbors that it is.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Our housing element has not been certified yet.
    Maybe there is time. The shelter site needs to be located at 1 Carter. One homeless shelter will guarantee the place will never be built on.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This will sound extreme to some, but weren't there a lot of Germans after WWII who said they couldn't do anything about some of the stuff their central govt was doing?

    ReplyDelete
  17. There are plenty of American patriots here in Sierra Madre who are willing to do something about what their central/big government idiots are trying to do.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I work in Pasadena, I've been seeing more and more homeless mentally ill in Old Pasadena area and surrounding area.
    The Apple store on Colorado has to lock restrooms to keep out homeless street people who trash them and use drugs. This is a very busy store.
    I have seen urine/feces on sidewalks and gutters. This is a well known problem in Venice Beach and parts of Santa Monica and other areas on the West side of LA.
    Is this what we want to see in little Sierra Madre? How can our city support this? Perhaps this is why we have built up our police force to such an unsustainable level? Could be.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anon 8:13
    The city is trying VERY hard to put the Hildreth's home into receivership, and the subsequent lawsuit, and following motions have been alot for the lay person to figure out. The sharp practices of the firm the city hired to handle the case has added to the enigma. At one point the firm was found to be lying in open court about the case. This all led to the Hildreths bieng able to introduce all the 10 years of documentation. So at times the city had Jeff and Taryn feel like they would loose their home. Jeff has been beating the city is abusing us drum for ten years, if you heard that one beat then even if its slightly wrong at least the conversation has started.
    Neuroblast Films

    ReplyDelete
  20. IF there has to be a homeless shelter on Montecito, wouldn't it make sense for it to house the Sierra Madre homeless? While there may not be any just yet, with the economy tanking there could be a need in the next year or so. IF a private group/consortium could step forward to provide such services we'd have much more control. Let's not have what happened with the senior housing happen with a homeless shelter -- accept outside money, accept outside rules and regulations.

    ReplyDelete
  21. First, a "shelter" will attract homeless from everywhere. Shelters are discussed online and people will even come from out of state.

    Second, support services involve huge amounts of money, state and federal bureaucracy, and personnel. A shelter is not just a place to stay on a cold night, it's a place to find food, to take a shower, to get medical treatment, and to establish an address for other social services.

    Third, most people who use homeless services use them permanently. Once you attract the clientele you will have them permanently and they will inform their friends to join them.

    Four, those availing themselves of the shelter, will be part of a program from which after some number of months, they will need to "transition" to more permanent housing that we would have to provide.

    Five, most of this population is "dual-diagnosis" meaning they suffer from mental illness and substance abuse. They chose not to take psychiatric medications, but instead get high on illegal drugs which brings in the drug dealers.

    Six, the money for the illegal drugs often comes from prostition for both the male and female clientele.

    Seven, once you attract a population, it self-propagates as now you will need to have separate housing for singles, families, males, females.

    Eight, the police force will have to be expanded to deal with the new problems. For example, Pasadena has designated officer simply to deal with homeless issues.

    Nine, like any other people, the homeless tend to socialize, so individuals availing themselves or our services, will attract others, whether or not the others choose to stay, still puts then in our neignborhoods.

    Ten, you will be accosted by panhandlers who need money for cigarettes and who don't pay attention to your no-smoking ordinances.

    I need to stop here in order to get to my job in a city better equipped to handle homelessness. This is a Pandora's Box you don't want to open.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I suppose the city will get stuck with the bills associated with this shelter. Will we also need to provide other services? The whole thing stinks. I got a good public education, got a job, saved money so I could live in Sierra Madre, no I am being told by some state jackasses I also have to pay for societies dropouts. Bunch of crap. If I wanted to live among the homeless I would move to Skid Row.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It sounds like the Hildreths are going lose their house because the city in going to bankrupt them. No one can fight a city and their attorneys without an attorney of there own. It take money, the City's Attorneys know the Hildreth do not have enough to defend themselves so they're slaming them.

    Welcome to America and the Judical process.

    It is very sad what this City is doing to the Hildreths - period. To think otherwise, I wish it happens to you and your family.

    The Hildreths are good people. About to be homeless so maybe they will need use of the homeless shelter.

    I wonder if it will be at their own home?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Please re-read post at 9:15August 19, 2011 at 9:42 AM

    In the Know at 9:15:

    thanks for giving us these facts.
    I urge everyone to read and re-read your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  25. You may be in the know, but you seem to lack compassion. All God's children need to be free to live where they choose. I think you're rich children need to be exposed to the real world. If you are so afraid of the unfortunate, you can just keep your windows rolled up as you pass by on your way to your air conditioned residence. And I'll bet your children are chaufered to all their lessons and little leagues and so how can you imply they would be exposed to drugs and prostition.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Oh Well,another nail in the coffin of the Grand Old Republic.Central Authority authorizing the "correct" allocation of population to be distributed through out the lands.I guess this can be justified in some bizarre way to "Energy".The bottom line driving all this nonsense is "Very Big Money".A lot of people have their beaks in the pie and are waiting for their share.They care not for you or the land,It's the new EL DORADO.

    ReplyDelete
  27. 9:50 - can you please elaborate how exposing children to drug addicts is good for them. A lot of people came here to raise their kids precisely because this city doesn't have people like that roaming the streets. Did they make a mistake?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ah, time for the gates to go up to the south, to east, and to the west! No poor, no homeless, no downtrodden, no "people like that roaming the streets" because Sierra Madre is an All American City. Why even those theiving skateboards and latch key kids are bussed in. Be assured that if you lunch on salads with the civic leaders, God loves you.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Folks like 9:50 are basically enablers. In their attempt to be compassionate they create a sub-culture that puts the mentally ill on the streets, where they are a danger to themselves as well as others.

    There are no easy solutions, but the worst option is to disperse the mentally ill into suburban areas that lack the infrastructure to cope with them.

    I'm sorry, 9:50, your heart may be in the right place, but this issue needs to be handled with reason as well as with compassion.

    ReplyDelete
  30. So, are the "civic leaders" for or against the downtrodden?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Lopez at 9:20 am

    thanks, friend, you speak for a majority of us here in Sierra Madre.

    When the centralized government cartel can get away with this, we are finished, unless we stand together and fight.

    Protest Mosca, Buchanan, Walsh and Moran.
    WE DON'T WANT THIS, you are suppose to be representing the people of this town.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Where the home in the valley meets the damp dirty prison."

    . . . it's a hard rain gonna fall . . .

    ReplyDelete
  33. In the lovely Orwellian language employed by Sacramento, dumping homeless people into the middle of a small suburban bedroom community is known as "social equity." This isn't all of it by any means.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Has the City thought of placing "Out Houses" at strategic location throughout the community.This is not a laughable matter.Whereas Pasadena can absorb a greater number of homeless and their leavings,this could become a serious issue for this 3sq mile community.I think the City needs to access the cost to the Community at large in their rush to "comply" to the State Agent's Dictate.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If you think the Gang of 4 will oppose a homeless shelter in Sierra Madre then you have another thing coming. As far as Buchanan and Mosca are concerned you can't kiss Sacramento's butt hard enough.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Kodiacks on every corner! And some of those little capsule one room shelters in every public parking lot! And, by the way, a Kodiack at the Gold Line station. The elevators are regularly a sea of pee (and worse) because there are no facilities.

    ReplyDelete
  37. The sanitation issue was a very big problem in Santa Barbara, when a homeless population took up residence on the beaches. A poster yesterday brought up the Santa Barbara struggle as an example of heartless snobbery, but in actuality it was about keeping tourism alive, which in turn keeps Santa Barbara in healthy economic shape. And the lack of ability to provide the homeless with sewers and trash disposal was real and difficult. It becomes a matter of pubic health.

    ReplyDelete
  38. . . . to absorb more homeless . . . maybe we need more absorbant landscaping and hardscaping. The plastic "grass" in front of the beautiful condos on East Montecito won't hold up to frequent homeless fliers.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Can we designate the homes of Mosca, Buchanan, Walsh, and Moran as Official Homeless Comfort Stations.

    And a few other posters here seem to want to share the comforts of home with mentally ill drug addicts. Go for it, but don't try to drag me down with you.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Why are there only seven - count 'em seven - households on East Montecito with registered voters? It would be much easier to fight for the Hildreths, and all those folks who don't want East Montecito to become a dumping ground for indigents if we had some help here!

    Don't sit back and wait for the resources to miraculously appears to help you fight your batltles! Help yourselves!!! Get to the Post Office and fill out a voter registration form. Help us put up a defense against the weasels who the Dirts want to put into office!

    Neuroblast, get some forms and pass them out. Help us help you.

    ReplyDelete
  41. It Can't Happen HereAugust 19, 2011 at 12:02 PM

    O, it already did. 1993. November 7. A homeless man startedd a fire on private property "to stay warm." One Hundred Twenty-One (121) structures were destroyed and Forty (40) were damaged.

    A few examples:

    4000 N. Hill Road: destroyed

    2934 N. Zane Grey Terrace: destroyed

    2954 N. Zane Grey Terrace: destroyed

    2984 N. Zane Grey Terrace: destroyed

    2989 N. Zane Grey Terrace: destroyed

    2998 N. Zane Grey Terrace: destroyed

    3052 N. Zane Grey Terrace: damaged

    Kinneloa Mesa Estates, Pasadena Glen

    3277 E. Barhite Street: damaged

    3287 E. Barhite Street: damaged

    3300 E. Barhite Street: damaged

    2179 Brambling Lane: destroyed

    2185 Brambling Lane: destroyed

    2207 Brambling Lane: destroyed

    2210 Brambling Lane: destroyed

    2250 Brambling Lane: destroyed

    2300 N. Brambling Lane: destroyed

    1976 Canyon Close Road: destroyed

    2100 Canyon Close Road: destroyed

    2870 E. Clarmeya Lane: destroyed

    2924 E. Clarmeya Lane: destroyed

    1701 N. Country Lane: destroyed

    1755 N. Country Lane: destroyed

    1801 N. Country Lane: damaged

    1881 N. Country Lane: damaged

    1905 N. Country Lane: destroyed

    1990 N. Cricklewood Path: destroyed

    2002 N. Cricklewood Path: destroyed

    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This isn't big money, there is no big money in homeless shelters. This is Sacramento's unfunded mandate to take social engineering to its height. You may think that big government doesn't effect you, but look what the Feds are doing now with their giving green cards to those in the country illegally, thus taking away what few jobs there are from Citizens. And look what SCAG/COG/RHNA/and the redistricting has done to Sierra Madre. Redistricting has taken away all of our fiscal Conservative representatives and placed us in districts where the representatives like to spend your money on things like homeless shelters. The reason homeless shelters are a mandate is because cities like ours, with few homeless all say NIMBY! So, we're forced to share the burden. Think before you vote and get the spenders out of office.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I agree with the Tattler, if the people we hire don't follow the will of the Citizens of Sierra Madre they should be fired. The City manager keeps ignoring our wishes she should go. To place a homeless shelter in the downtown we are asking her to destroy our village. We are too small of a town to have a homeless shelter. If we have a homelss problem of five, subsidize their rent. No more homeless problem. To even think or go through the motions of having a homeless, the person should be fired. How to ruin a Town in one easy flash.

    ReplyDelete
  44. The Hildreths are some of the heroes of this town. They are standing up to the injustice and abuse of the selective few who bully people in our town. I have seen the permits and the list that they provided the City. The City Administration wants to bully them into submission having them go broke in the process. We need to support the few that are brave enough to fight for “we the People”

    ReplyDelete
  45. Save Montecito.. I love Montecito & with all this talk about homeless people......consider this...How about all the homeless white collar workers ???? Yeah..how 'bout them!!!! Does anyone ever think about the white collar community of men that have lost their jobs???? Yeah, & they don't get much help & they're pretty much a pretty good population of upscale folks that need homes,too. I'm not saying that we don'tneed homeless shelter for indigents(OK Warren Buffet why don't you use your billons to open up those mental instiutions & closed down hospitals & pay decent wages to a lot of our unemployed & put californians back to work staffing them so there's a good revenue to support our taxes in Calif & get all of us out of debt), but where do the families that were working & contributing to the Caif. taxes each year go to live when they lost their homes? Montecito is a mix of commercial buildings but, also, some darling little cottages that show pride of ownership or renter-ship & these nice people must feel terrorized if they know what developers want to do with their homes. Homes should be a sanctuary & as good citizens of Sierra Madre we need to keep our community "sacrosanct." God bless us all!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anon at 12:04 and In The Know, it's correct that since Prop 13 passed, Sacramento has gotten out of the business of supporting disabled, indigent and homeless people and simply dumped the unfunded mandate into communities and group homes in R-1 neighborhoods. So the entire thing turns into a "nonprofit" industry that sucks up State and Federal taxes without any kind of controls or standards. Altadena (unincorporated) has turned into a dumping ground for this sort of thing because it's the responsibility of the County to oversee the programmatic aspects of these facilities, yet there are no governing agency reviews to enforce these "dumping ground" facilities.

    Some small communities have successfully kept this at bay, but the erosion of private rights and local control is changing this.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Clarification of post yesterday re: Assisted living: Sierra Madre SNF was bought & then sold by the same(GEM) entity that bought GEM Transitional SNF & Rehab in Pasadena prior to buying SM SNF. Poor judgement in keeping unco-operative staff at Gem is what led to the hostile takeover of SM SNF & 2HR warning & laying off long standing & co-operative existing staff with the resultant "replacing" new staff with "cousins & their (Gem entity) "in-house" staff. Good people, but then a "doomed" situation for the Gem entity & eventual closing down of Sierra Madre SNF. There's no telling who owns the current vacant SM SNF building. One thing for sure: the same angel that protects the San Gabriel Mtns & Sierra Madre from fires is also protecting our properties from big developers. Sleep easy.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Friend @12:02, where did you find that list of destroyed homes from 1993?

    And thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  49. If the Hildreths have been fighting the city for 10 years, then their battle started prior to Mosca, Moran, Walsh, Aguilar, Castro, maybe even before Buchanan. It's hard to understand how a vendetta against the Hildreths could have been carried on this long.

    I'm having trouble understanding this one.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Wasn't there something called the Montecito Development Specific Plan at about the same time as the Downtown Specific Plan? Does anyone have copies? I'm thinking if we could locate a copy it would shed light on what the City "grand" fathers have in mind - you know the ones... Doyle, Hays, Stockly, those guys. The ones to whom Buchanan owes his political career.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Montecito Settled!August 19, 2011 at 2:54 PM

    Just greenly tooling along Montecito and read the official sign:

    ARTS AND SHOPPING DISTRICT

    It's settled then. No condos, no homeless center.

    Case closed. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  52. The La Times article with the list of 161 structures damaged or destroyed by a single homeless man can be found here:

    http://articles.latimes.com/1993-11-07/news/ga-54181_1_altadena-fire

    ReplyDelete
  53. Hasn't there been more than one Montecito Scheme?
    Copies of those should be in the library - but ya never know.

    ReplyDelete
  54. The draft copy of the East Montecito Specific Plan from 2004 is in the library.

    ReplyDelete
  55. so, our city council doesn't represent us or put our concerns first, the absurdity of a supposed homeless shelter in Sierra Madre or even the converstation with our council shows how out of touch or that they really don't give a rats poot about the city

    I ask, why is the homeless situation in Pasadena our concern? Because Joe Mosca says so? He's just here to sell himself for the next gig.

    If we didn't have a homeless situation before, we will thanks to the plain stupidity of the proposal.

    Tell Mosca and Buchanan to go volunteer at the shelters if they want to do some good.

    ReplyDelete
  56. They had lots of specific plans back then. Unfortunately for the DIC the voters were quite specific as well.

    ReplyDelete
  57. dont' forget those on Highland or Serra Madre Blvd hat would be adjacent to a homeless shelter on Montecito.

    Put it at Buchanaan's house or Mosca's.

    Nancy Waslh could take in a couple of homeless borders

    Or Moran could pick up a couple new drinking buddies

    ReplyDelete
  58. Your right 3:36 pm! Absolutely correct! But if you pay attention to what the City Council is doing, you see they are following the DSP to a T. If you want to understand what's going on on East Montecito spend an hour at the library. The answers are there. 2-30-13 limits building in the "downtown" but not Montecito or the rest of Sierra Madre. Those plans are alive and well just tempered by 2-30-13.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Does "homeless Shelters" ever become an issue for San Marino,Arcadia,La Canada.If not,why not?Is it because their representatives are more savvy,enlightened or more sensitive to the wishes of their constituents IE:property owners and residents.Or is it because they select and elect better candidates to represent them.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The people who invested in the DSP own our city council.

    ReplyDelete
  61. You got it right, 4:16August 19, 2011 at 4:58 PM

    Buchanan, Walsh, Moran, Mosca are OWNED by the Downtown Investor's Club, better known to us on the TATLLER as the DIC'S.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Maybe Mosca thinks if he puts a large number of Pasadena homeless in Sierra Madre, he will get votes away from Holden?
    Sounds like a cheap slimy trick from Mosca

    ReplyDelete
  63. 3:59, East Montecito is in the Measure V area.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hmmmm me thinks that this homeless situation is a propaganda to encourage( & discourage) people to sell & get out of our little town & leave it for the DICs. Maybe we should sell Sierra Madre to a movie mogul & become the next reality show on TV. People love to watch dirty little secrets on TV. Oh, Anon @ 1:45PM...that would be Doyle & Stockley vs the Hildreths I think, sigh. Where there is beauty, there will surely be some DIC trying to make money off it. One of the oldest "trick" around.

    ReplyDelete
  65. East Montecito is covered by 2-30-13 Measure V.

    ReplyDelete
  66. POLITICS

    Poli + Tics


    Poli = many

    Tics = blood sucking parasites

    ReplyDelete
  67. The Hildreths were invited to do their project by the Troll and his minions. They are still in power. They are in the way or why would the city be spending all the money to get them out of the way.

    The Hildreths did not ask for this fight all one needs to do is see how many times they went in front of the city council asking for their help to know the true. There are alot of lies going around again why?

    The Hildreth are just in the way.

    Jeff and Taryn please don't give up the fight I don't know how you both are doing it.

    I am proud that you are.
    Hang in there we support you!

    This town needs you.

    Thank you both

    ReplyDelete
  68. "Tell Mosca and Buchanan to go volunteer at the shelters if they want to do some good."

    YES YES YES YES
    If it is so important the entire City Council and staff needs to sign up. They are so excited about this project!

    Let's see them spend time putting some effort into one of their big gotta do it.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Why put a homeless shelter in other peoples community. Why not their own?

    ReplyDelete
  70. I am a housing specialist and cannot believe the ignorance so many of you have. Not all homeless are drug addicts, mentally ill or sick. Many of them are veterans of wars you all support or seniors on a fixed income. Their income is not enough to pay todays ridiculous rents.

    If we lowered the rent then people would be out of the streets and buying more. Tent cities are coming up all over the U.S. Our jobs are being doled out to other countries. Many big corporations pay a lot less to foreign countries and many of our citizens cannot find work.

    How many times have you picked up your telephone for help only to hear someone from India? Everyone hates the Mexicans or illegals as you ingnorants call them but they provide a great service and really don't want to live here. The Bracero program worked great and they could go back and live in their country. We also don't have any problem using automated cash register's or ATM's, Post Office computers and a host of other jobs because we are in a hurry. More jobs lost WAKE UP THIS IS GOING TO GET WORSE!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  71. Who you calling ingnorants, pal?

    ReplyDelete

The Tattler is a moderated blog. Annoying delays when posting comments can happen. Thank you for your patience and understanding.