Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to work at an mcps school with a neighboring residential treatment facility and it was trouble...(Blair Ewing building and avery treatment center next door). It was trouble...we had patients wandering into the building--although usually just scaring the staff who were there at 4 pm and later. And there was a lot more land between these buildings.

Trust that some of these patients will wander onto the school grounds.

Exactly.

It’s not a lockdown facility, so the 16+ patients with acute addiction, mental health, and impulse control issues will be out and about.

And unlike the facility pp referenced, this facility literally borders the school playground and its driveway/front yard is squeezed between two SFHs on a very small cul-de-sac.

I lived across the street from a residential treatment facility and saw a knife fight in the street, two women in a fist fight that resulted in police arriving with guns drawn and another fight that left someone beaten to a pulp in the street. No thank you. People have a right to make enough money to live in a neighborhood that is typically safe and suburban if that's what they choose.

No. Every child deserves an education in a safe environment, which means the advocacy on this needs to be about policy not one neighborhood.

People don't have a right to a safe environment -- they have to earn their way there like everyone else. This is not the soviet union.

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

I hope some day your kids get to watch a knife fight in the street instead of playing with a soccer ball when you worked hard to be able to buy a house in a safe neighborhood just to see your sense of safety destroyed by the new rehab center. So there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MoCo is in a death spiral from far left ideology. This is exactly the kind of insanity voters like

I'm not sure that allowing for-profit companies unfettered access to our communities, regardless of impact on vulnerable groups such as children, is exactly a far left ideology. A nanny state would prohibit this sort of mixed use, whereas a right-wing capitalistic approach supports it.

Then, please do explain why our MoCo County Council has set up zoning laws to support this?

We are certainly no in a right-wing County or a right-wing state. Both the county and the state are super blue, Democrat-led jurisdictions.

Maryland is a predator friendly state. That’s why we house the sexual predator priests from all over the world in Silver Spring.

True. Predator friendly and criminal friendly. Thank you again to our local and state politicians.

This is outrageous top to bottom. Moco seems less and less desirable to live in every day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MoCo is in a death spiral from far left ideology. This is exactly the kind of insanity voters like

I'm not sure that allowing for-profit companies unfettered access to our communities, regardless of impact on vulnerable groups such as children, is exactly a far left ideology. A nanny state would prohibit this sort of mixed use, whereas a right-wing capitalistic approach supports it.

Then, please do explain why our MoCo County Council has set up zoning laws to support this?

We are certainly no in a right-wing County or a right-wing state. Both the county and the state are super blue, Democrat-led jurisdictions.

Maryland is a predator friendly state. That’s why we house the sexual predator priests from all over the world in Silver Spring.

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

This makes as much sense to me as putting a gun shop right next to elementary school. It’s not about the treatment center (and it’s not about the gun shop). It is about literally having it next to the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

I think it's reasonable to point out that a treatment center like this probably shouldn't border an elementary school. That's not NIMBYism, that's common sense.

Treatment Center like this-You might as well use the words-Those people but look over your shoulder first so nobody hears you saying it

“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.”

No one is afraid to say out loud that housing 16 people with severe diagnoses, impulse control issues and/or dangerous symptoms on a property sharing a fence with an elementary school playground is a bad idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

I think it's reasonable to point out that a treatment center like this probably shouldn't border an elementary school. That's not NIMBYism, that's common sense.

This is Montgomery County. Any opposition to development of any kind is considered NIMBYism. Are you new here?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

I think it's reasonable to point out that a treatment center like this probably shouldn't border an elementary school. That's not NIMBYism, that's common sense.

Treatment Center like this-You might as well use the words-Those people but look over your shoulder first so nobody hears you saying it

Anonymous wrote:Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

I think it's reasonable to point out that a treatment center like this probably shouldn't border an elementary school. That's not NIMBYism, that's common sense.

Typical NIMBY folks. Just move it to that other area just don't build it here.

I hope someday you don't need services and the neighbors decide they are more important than your recovery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MoCo is in a death spiral from far left ideology. This is exactly the kind of insanity voters like

I'm not sure that allowing for-profit companies unfettered access to our communities, regardless of impact on vulnerable groups such as children, is exactly a far left ideology. A nanny state would prohibit this sort of mixed use, whereas a right-wing capitalistic approach supports it.

Then, please do explain why our MoCo County Council has set up zoning laws to support this?

We are certainly no in a right-wing County or a right-wing state. Both the county and the state are super blue, Democrat-led jurisdictions.

Anonymous wrote:MoCo is in a death spiral from far left ideology. This is exactly the kind of insanity voters like

I'm not sure that allowing for-profit companies unfettered access to our communities, regardless of impact on vulnerable groups such as children, is exactly a far left ideology. A nanny state would prohibit this sort of mixed use, whereas a right-wing capitalistic approach supports it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone should question the judgment of the County’s DPS as well as elected officials for letting this happen and not stepping up to find a solution.

They are collectively shrugging their shoulders rather than engaging to steer this in another direction.

People must voice their concerns (in large numbers) if there is any chance of preventing this from happening.

Correct. Best targets for action are DPS, County Council and Elrich. All three are the key decision makers here.

MCPS is just the victim of this decision.

Then why aren’t they speaking up?

The County Council member didn’t show up to the meeting at the school, but her staffer said there’s nothing the county can do because the current zoning law allows this.

I can’t believe that’s the case since the county council and County Executive have made things happen when they are so inclined.

What sorts of things have they "made happen?"

Genuine question, because the staffer is correct that current zoning allows this. Without policy change, there's no clear legal mechanism for the county to do anything, and they would be courting a discrimination lawsuit if they tried.

Anyone who has been paying attention and voting in MoCo elections over the past decade should know this. This is what voters want and what voters will get.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't disagree with you in theory, but as an advocacy campaign this needs some work.

First of all, lose the talking points about property values. That's muddying the waters and making it look like student safety is an afterthought rather than the point of the campaign.

Second, focus on this case as an example of the needs for better laws county-wide. As the law stands, this company is absolutely within its legal rights to be where it is. So the point is to change the zoning/regulations, not just to "save" this one elementary school.

Third, why are you listing BoE as decision-makers? Is the theory of change that you could get them to pressure the County? That's a dicey proposition, as there is not really any love lost between BoE and County Council.

+1 This would be true advocacy. Additionally, providing other alternatives like the farm space you suggested and how the increase space could be beneficial to the patients both in providing fresh air, space for outdoor therapy to include gardening and walks.

Sigh.

The company already owns the properties and plans to launch by August.

There’s nothing the residents can do. There’s no advocacy that will matter since the county council member (more directly, their staff person who attended the meeting) has said the zoning law allows this.

At this point, all people can do is flood the zone to make a lot of noise. A groundswell of displeasure to the elected officials—the County Executive and all county council members—to demonstrate voters aren’t happy and will remember this.

This is crazy. It’s nonsense like this that prompts young homebuyers to opt for NoVA rather than MoCo. No wonder we have a shrinking tax base.

FTR, we want and need treatment services. We just don’t want them alongside a school—or this big and shoe-horned in between SFHs.

And we obviously don’t think a massive for-profit FL-based business should be in the driver’s seat.

The CE and council members should publicly acknowledge this is wrong and try to come up with a solution. If they don’t, there are upwards of 1k residents who have already signed the petition, and these people vote. Since they will be reminded of this everyday if it goes through, I’m sure residents will remind voters of this next time around.

Fix it, MoCo.