SPAR Tries to Pass Law to Ban Non Family Members from Living Together.

[Springfield Girl]

Stephen, I do not have any obsession or entitlement regarding property values. I just want to be a decent neighbor, and get the same in return.

[Springfield Girl]

Sheclown, the problem, as has been stated many times before is the same as having too many renters of any kind in a neighborhood. Renters for the most part are just passing through. They have no vested interest in the success of a neighborhoood. When people choose to buy a home in any given neighborhood they care about how that house and neighborhood look cosmetically. They care about how others see their home and neighborhood. There is always the exception but most resident homeowners take pride in their property and want to be perceived well by their neighbors. When someone has no ties to the property, neighbors and neighborhood and are just passing through they don't have the above concerns. Everytime I read these posts I think we should just post pictures. Again, there are always exceptions but lets see what rental properties look like compared to owner occupied. My neighbors who own their houses all keep up their yards and homes and are respectful of the neighbors ie noise, parking, animals. When we have had renters they have not kept up the properties in the same way. Some have been respectful of others right and some have not.  

[Springfield Girl]

Stephen, you're putting words in my mouth and posts. Be nice and reread the post. I said there were always exceptions. Your too smart for these shenanigans.

[Springfield Girl]

How does having people in recovery hurt a neighborhood?  I really don't get that.  But it really doesn't matter.

Many of our men have lived in Springfield for decades.  If they are "passing through", they are not doing a very good job of it.  Again, it really doesn't matter.

What does matter is ...the Fair Housing Act makes is a violation of federal law to discriminate against people who are in recovery.  That means, no city, neighborhood, or state regulations can zone out a group of people, or even limit the number of disabled people in a neighborhood. 

and no one person or business should be actively trying to bring them all into one small square mile neighborhood. It is not good for either side, and very unfair for one small community to carry the burden of the entire city.

[sheclown]

Some would say, it is hardly a "burden."

[Springfield Girl]

lol.  I love you!

And so true!

We both are.!

Yeah, we really could both be doing something more productive than this. It is a waste of our talents. What should we focus on? Could it be something fun and productive Pleeaasse?

[Springfield Girl]

Well, I'm not one of those but you know what they say about opinions.

[strider]

Lisa,

I'm saying I don't know anything about any so called new legislation but do support laws and the intention of laws already on the books. I would have to be educated on any issue before I could support or oppose it.

Well, as you are on the board, and I have been told that you have said that SPAR Council, or actually the phrase used was “we”, are going ahead with the “new legislation”, I find you not knowing about it as being very odd.  If  I were you I would make a few calls and find out what’s going on. A suggestion just in case you really are out  of the loop.

The city does a poor job of enforcing existing laws whether it be zoning, preservation or any other issue and that is a problem. I agree with what Dan has said in the past that just because someone can find a way around a law or use conflicting interpretations to further their business endeavors or personal mission does not mean they should.

And yet, here we have you on the SPAR Council board who regularly just interprets your own by-laws as you see fit.  Interesting that you try to hold others to a higher level than you hold yourself.

Joe, you love to bash and damn everyone (developers, SPAR, residents of Springfield)for their views that you do not support while belittling our views and concerns about your mission to bring recovering addicts en masse into the neighborhood we live in.

Actually, I have “bashed” very few.  And typically, only those who have “bashed” me. Unlike some on the SPAR Council, I have this annoying habit of using something called facts.  But, you have proven many times that lies and innuendo can get you pretty far, it just isn’t very, well, pretty. And the mission isn’t bringing recovering addicts to Springfield, it is taking care of the ones that are here.

You have a mission that you believe in but that does not make your mission, business or rights any more important than ours.

True, but it also doesn’t make it less important than yours.

We are homeowners that live here with our families, though you have less concern for our feelings than you do for recovering addicts that are paying your mortgages while just passing through the neighborhood.

Passing through the neighborhood,  How is it that you can defend others moving out of the community but throw it up in our faces every change you get.  And the fact the we spend more time in Springfield even now and once lived there longer than many who constantly ridicule us means nothing?  It is fine for someone you like to just have businesses here or just have investments here, but not us.  I get it .  It’s personal.

You do not care about our concerns but demand that we care about yours. It doesn't work that way and doesn't garner any support for your cause.

Perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn’t.  It depends on whether your take on this is right or not.

I get that you FEEL you have been unfairly attacked by a FEW but how does going against the wishes of so many neighbors correct that.

Hmmm… the 10 or so e-mails from Louise to Dr. Gaffney, Kimberly Scott and Sean Kelly that mention me by name and refer to all the damage I have done, all the bad things I am doing and the fact that no one from SPAR Council or Dr. Gaffney’s office has ever called me to see what is really going on isn’t supposed to make me feel like I am being really being attacked? Interesting take on it, Lisa.  And what neighbors are you talking about again?  The ones that have had only the lies and innuendo from SPAR Council to base any decision on?

You have stated on several occasions that SPAR just cares about winning a perceived battle with you but I see it the other way.

I’m sure you do.

You will damn the whole neighborhood and spite us by forcing your mission and business down our throats because of some vendetta against SPAR.

It would seem there is more of a vendetta against us.  We would have been just as happy to let sleeping dogs lie, but we instead have been labeled, once again, as the bad guys.  So be it. But you can not fault us for picking up the challenge.  You could be referring to us being involved with pointing out the lack of following the laws of the organization on the part of the Executive Board, but then , there were just regular residents involved with that as well.   As to this damning of the neighborhood, go look at a couple of the other Springfield threads; Louise seems to have been doing a pretty good job of that herself.

SPAR is not hurt by having multiple halfway houses/boarding houses/quasi halfwayhouses or detox centers in the neighborhood. The ones hurt are the families who chose to put down roots here and invest their money to rehab a home and bring this historic neighborhood back from the dregs and despair it had been reduced to

.

See, once again, as investors and business owners, you consider us second class citizens and that we have fewer rights than just old regular home owners.  Have you told that to Mack?  After all, he doesn’t live here either.

In the end if winning makes you feel good in spite of hurting the families and full time residents of Springfield you will only deserve our contempt.

No, winning, to use your turn of phrase, has in the past and will in the future, be about nothing but securing the rights of a group of people who are as much  residents as you are and have the same rights as such as you do.  If I earn your contempt for doing that, then I will wear that contempt with pride.

[sheclown]

Already we have your contempt, have had your contempt for years....really what will change?

[iluvolives]

So stephendare, is there any number that you feel would be reasonable to limit the number of unrelated individuals (not including law, marriage or blood) living in a single family home that should be regulated?

[iluvolives]

I do think there should be regulation on what "Single-family residence" means. Otherwise what is the point of zoning at all?

[braeburn]

Is this really about an organization attempting to correct what they feel is wrong - or - is this where they want to set a precedent and have sufficient ammunition for a one-sided argument in the future?

[iluvolives]

use of property.so that you dont have poisonous industrial businesses opening next door.

like recovery homes?

[braeburn]

OK, so where would YOU like the recovery homes to be? "Just not here" is not a valid response.

[iluvolives]

The question was to you Stephendare- should there be no limit on single family home? Should I be allowed to cram 45 unrelated individuals into 1 bath 1 bedroom home, no matter what neighborhood it's in?