Actually, people in active treatment are not protected by federal law when it comes to such things. And medical treatment facilities don’t enjoy such protections either. The county’s current interpretation of the county law is the issue. And their decision to not amend the law to prevent this from happening again is baffling. |
The way you stop it is by changing the law. While it doesn’t help stop this current project, it WILL stop other similar projects moving forward. Everyone should email the county exec and all council members to say this: Subject: Fix the zoning law so we aren’t inundated with overly large treatment facilities in residential areas —or next to schools Dear X: As a concerned voter and homeowner, I am shocked to hear about the level 3.5 treatment facility for 16+ people that will open soon next door to a school. While I realize amending the zoning law will not fix the problem impacting Brookeville and Greenwood, taking action to change the law moving forward will prevent the proliferation of overly large treatment facilities in residential neighborhoods—as well as prevent them from being located adjacent to schools. This is common sense. Just because the zoning laws have been in place for decades doesn’t make it right. Take action to fix the problem moving forward or publicly share why you won’t. And please spare us with the rhetoric attempting to shame us into silence. We realize people need access to residential treatment; we just don’t want large facilities to be located in SFHs in residential areas—and we certainly don’t want high level facilities located next to a school. If our elected leaders disagree and refuse to fix the problem moving forward, our assumption is that you are beholden to the for-profit businesses currently gaming the MoCo zoning and permitting system. |
Has the neighborhood hired a lawyer yet?
If not, what are you waiting for? |
Addiction is considered a disability, active treatment or not. It's not the county's interpretation, there is case law around this issue. The county will not change zoning so that it violates a federal law. You really need to consult an attorney specializing in zoning and the Fair Housing Act. |
The county can ban all group homes and treatment facilities from being a certain size in SFHs (hint: 8 is too many) AND prevent them from being located next to schools. When the law applies to everyone/all group homes then it isn’t discriminatory. Plus, there is a difference when it comes to this facility. It’s not housing; it’s a medical treatment facility akin to a hospital. While FHA applies to sober living group homes, this facility is not a residence or housing. Regardless, there is an easy way to fix this going forward: amend the zoning law and have it apply across the board. |
There are group homes all around the county for people with disabilities as well as for people who are aging and unable to live alone. Most of us probably have them in our neighborhood and don’t know it. The issue of finding a location for these type of facilities is a real problem. We can’t really think it’s possible to send everyone who needs group homes type related care and services to another county or state. |
If the individuals are going to be in treatment 24/7 (this is a level 3.5 facility,) there's no explicit need for low-crime, single-family neighborhood. They aren't going to be out and about in the neighborhood and have no requirement for an environment that would help them avoid their impulses. That's why FHA doesn't apply here. They need housing, they don't need access to specific neighborhoods in this case. |
It has to apply to everyone period. If you aren't permitting more then 8 people to live in an house (no matter the lot or home size), even if they are related, then perhaps it would apply. But you'll still get group homes from non-related people of 5-6 individuals. Again you really need an attorney. This is going nowhere for Greenwood, and likely nowhere for future development and purchases of existing residences |
You can make it so NO group home can be located within a certain range of a school. That’s not discriminatory. But the county doesn’t want to change the law. Ask yourself why. You can make it so you can’t have more than 4 unrelated people living in a SFH. You can make it so all residential treatment facilities cannot be located in a residential neighborhood. None of this would be discriminatory. |
Group homes are different from residential treatment facilities requiring 24/7 medical personnel. |
Where'd you get your law degree |
No corporation purchased homes. 4 guys, one who went to QOHS bought homes. |
Right. They were gaming the system. They purchased the properties for the company they work for. They lied about their intentions precisely to keep it under wraps so they could get permits before the neighborhood could complain. And the county doesn’t care. |
This is the first I heard of that!! |
No company is on the deed. They did it to remove liability. |