Anonymous wrote:These "treatment centers" are scams. They warehouse addicts until their money or insurance or Medicaid runs out, then dump them on the street. That's their proft-maximizing incentive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Mentally ill addicts with impulse control issues leering at kids across the fence or wandering around school property. There will be 16+ beds and this is a for-profit business that needs to keep the beds filled to make a profit.

The neighborhood has a wooded path along the perimeter of the school to the neighborhood park and pool. It’s the easiest way to walk from the facility location to the nearest shopping center.

16+ strangers crammed into a facility rotating through on 30 day stints, new people and staff and vendors coming and going.

This doesn’t belong by a school or between SFHs.

“Mentally ill addicts” are not pedophiles; where is this “leering” nonsense coming from? You sound like a nut.

The same rules about loitering apply to them as to any of your existing neighbors.

What universe do you live in? Moco has not been known to enforce noise ordinances or loitering rules for a long time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Mentally ill addicts with impulse control issues leering at kids across the fence or wandering around school property. There will be 16+ beds and this is a for-profit business that needs to keep the beds filled to make a profit.

The neighborhood has a wooded path along the perimeter of the school to the neighborhood park and pool. It’s the easiest way to walk from the facility location to the nearest shopping center.

16+ strangers crammed into a facility rotating through on 30 day stints, new people and staff and vendors coming and going.

This doesn’t belong by a school or between SFHs.

“Mentally ill addicts” are not pedophiles; where is this “leering” nonsense coming from? You sound like a nut.

The same rules about loitering apply to them as to any of your existing neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the PTA meeting we were informed that the facility will be a level 3.5 treatment facility: Clinically Managed High-Intensity Residential Services.

Level 3.5 involves high-intensity programs for adults who cannot be treated outside of a 24/7 facility due to severe physical or psychological problems or severe impulse control problems, or because they display dangerous symptoms that require 24-hour monitoring.5,6 Treatment services are provided by an interdisciplinary team, and onsite physicians are available but not required for phone or in-person consultation. Level 3.5 care typically takes place in freestanding facilities or specialty units of healthcare facilities (read: not in neighborhood homes).

You wrote this with (read: not in neighborhood homes) on another thread. Most of these kinds of facilities are in neighborhood homes. That's exactly what "freestanding facilities" means. It means not physically attached to a hospital or clinic or other facility. Since people are learning skills to help them return to neighborhood homes, it makes sense for them to practice in neighborhood homes.

The fact that someone has impulsivity issues that mean they need support to stay sober in the early months, or health issues that make detoxing in their own home unsafe for them doesn't make them dangerous to neighbors.

Most communities take a more thoughtful approach to zoning to avoid having 16+ people (plus staff) squeezed into a for-profit high level care facility next to a school and in between SFHs.

Most communities would treat such a large and complex care facility in a better location.

This is very different than a nonprofit recovery home with 3 or 4 individuals and a staff person. Equating the two makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Mentally ill addicts with impulse control issues leering at kids across the fence or wandering around school property. There will be 16+ beds and this is a for-profit business that needs to keep the beds filled to make a profit.

The neighborhood has a wooded path along the perimeter of the school to the neighborhood park and pool. It’s the easiest way to walk from the facility location to the nearest shopping center.

16+ strangers crammed into a facility rotating through on 30 day stints, new people and staff and vendors coming and going.

This doesn’t belong by a school or between SFHs.

“Mentally ill addicts” are not pedophiles; where is this “leering” nonsense coming from? You sound like a nut.

The same rules about loitering apply to them as to any of your existing neighbors.

Generally speaking, people with severe mental health issues can be unpredictable. Nobody has suggested they might serve pedophiles (hopefully that won’t be the case), but the company’s website says they serve people with schizophrenia and other serious mental health issues.

Again, these people should have access to residential treatment. The question is why allow a for-profit’s business venture take precedence over the community’s interest of not having such a large facility alongside an elementary school and smack dab in the middle of two SFHs?

Quick show of hands: who would want a 16+ bed facility immediately next to their school or house?

ICYMI: there is a somewhat similar facility over on Avery Road near a school and their faculty have flagged that it presents real issues—including patients wandering onto the property and into the building.

Anonymous wrote:These "treatment centers" are scams. They warehouse addicts until their money or insurance or Medicaid runs out, then dump them on the street. That's their proft-maximizing incentive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Mentally ill addicts with impulse control issues leering at kids across the fence or wandering around school property. There will be 16+ beds and this is a for-profit business that needs to keep the beds filled to make a profit.

The neighborhood has a wooded path along the perimeter of the school to the neighborhood park and pool. It’s the easiest way to walk from the facility location to the nearest shopping center.

16+ strangers crammed into a facility rotating through on 30 day stints, new people and staff and vendors coming and going.

This doesn’t belong by a school or between SFHs.

“Mentally ill addicts” are not pedophiles; where is this “leering” nonsense coming from? You sound like a nut.

The same rules about loitering apply to them as to any of your existing neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Mentally ill addicts with impulse control issues leering at kids across the fence or wandering around school property. There will be 16+ beds and this is a for-profit business that needs to keep the beds filled to make a profit.

The neighborhood has a wooded path along the perimeter of the school to the neighborhood park and pool. It’s the easiest way to walk from the facility location to the nearest shopping center.

16+ strangers crammed into a facility rotating through on 30 day stints, new people and staff and vendors coming and going.

This doesn’t belong by a school or between SFHs.

Anonymous wrote:What is the day to day nuisance you are afraid of? Sounds like you expect residents to try passing needles through the fence to kids at recess or something similarly far fetched.

Anonymous wrote:The untreated addict who lives next door is a far greater risk to you than those in structured treatment.