HomeMy WebLinkAboutAnonymous 3 - ecomment (Item 9)From:noreply@granicusideas.com
To:City Clerk; Yasuda, Erica; Woodward, Carrie; E-Comments
Subject:New eComment for Regular Meeting of the City Council/Closed Session-5:30 pm/Regular Meeting-7:00 pm
Date:Tuesday, March 7, 2023 7:01:29 PM
SpeakUpNew eComment for Regular Meeting of the CityCouncil/Closed Session-5:30 pm/RegularMeeting-7:00 pm
Melissa Baum submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: Regular Meeting of the City Council/Closed Session-5:30 pm/Regular Meeting-7:00 pm
Item: 9. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO DENY REQUEST FOR
DISABILITY-RELATED MODIFICATION OF CITY POLICIES, PRACTICES, AND/OR
PROCEDURES Philip Teyssier of Atomic Investments, Inc. (“Appellant”) appeals from the
Planning Commission’s denial of a request for disability-related reasonable modification of City
policies, practices, and/or procedures to allow California Treatment Services, a subsidiary of
Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. (“Acadia”) to operate an outpatient treatment and counselling
center (“Comprehensive Treatment Center” or “CTC”) at a commercial property owned by the
Appellant located at 535 E. First Street. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (“ADA”)
ADVISORY STATEMENT RELATED TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT: If approved, the
proposed CTC would exclusively serve persons receiving treatment for Opioid Use Disorder. To
be a patient at the CTC, an individual cannot be actively using illegal drugs. Persons receiving
such treatment are “qualified individual[s] with a disability” afforded full protection under the ADA
and the ADA prohibits the City from discriminating against qualified individuals in making land
use decisions. In considering this application and the appeal, the City Council may not treat the
proposed CTC differently than it would any other medical clinic. It may not base its decision on
the fact that patients at the CTC will be receiving treatment for Opioid Use Disorder. Nor may
unsubstantiated fears, prejudice, or stereotypes related to persons recovering from Opioid Use
Disorder form the basis of the City Council’s decision.
eComment: I am a business owner, and owner of a commercial building in Tustin, just a street
over from this building. The majority of our patient base is aged 7-18. I strongly disagree with this
Opioid treatment center being placed in this location, in Tustin. I don’t feel there is the need for
this in the middle of Tustin for many reasons mainly based on security and safety. There is a
dialysis clinic downstairs in the same building this business is trying to move into. The dialysis
clinic left their previous location where the Opioid business was a neighbor. They left due to the
harassment and patient base from this clinic. There is a large pediatric medical group as well as
a Pediatric Dentistry group that is in the building behind this proposed building location. Children,
which many are our patient group walk by this building. I have a great concern for those children
walking by and this clinic is giving curbside injections/treatment on the parking lot. I agree with all
the points many concerned citizens had at the previous meeting as well. Has the council viewed
the current area and conditions of there previous locations? I don’t see why the City of Tustin
would find this necessary to add such a safety and security risk to our city. The regional manager
stated her patient clientele don’t have cars and rely on public transportation. That means the
volume of patients will be a very large group waiting for the bus and waiting around for various
buses. They would also be getting treatment in the parking lot. We are proud to have our
business in Tustin and to live here. I strongly disagree with allowing this business to operate at
this location in Tustin.
View and Analyze eComments
This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com.
Unsubscribe from future mailings