HomeMy WebLinkAboutCho, Luis - 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 7:31:28 AM
SpeakUpNew eComment for Regular Meeting of the CityCouncil/Closed Session-5:30 pm/RegularMeeting-7:00 pm
Guest User 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 lived in for two years. Initially, the property was great (they
offered 3 months of free rent on move-in), but they kindly forgot to mention all the junkies that
roamed the neighborhood. I think that’s why they offered free rent, to lure people in. My car was
broken into twice, and while walking my dog, I have seen multiple people defecate in broad
daylight, people screaming at all times of the day that you cannot even leave your windows
open. The druggies would somehow get into our building, which is accessed by key fobs, and we
had the police called multiple times to get rid of them. Because my rent increased, I decided to
move to Tustin and rent a home in the old town with my fiancé. We were shocked to hear about
this from other neighbors and are reliving this nightmare that we left Santa Ana, to begin with.
Please do not approve this project. These people must be hospitalized and not allowed to roam
the street, creating chaos wherever they go. These people are a societal problem and will pose
enormous risks to the neighborhoods around them. There is a school nearby and multiple
shopping centers where they can loot and steal from. Please don’t turn my new community I love
into a porta potty. These clinics perpetuate the problem while they defraud our government of
resources in the name of help. Sincerely Old Town Resident, Luis Cho
View and Analyze eComments
This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com.
Unsubscribe from future mailings