A LOLA yelled out to Joe "go ahead, lie some more!!"

[sheclown]

Monday lunch time and I just got back from the Special Masters Hearing on "illegal" rooming houses.
The house on Perry Street had been cited as an “illegal rooming house” and was before the Special Masters a quasi-judicial hearing.

The house in question is a tri-plex which currently houses 10 people.

Angi’s other house on east 3rd was found to be in compliance and the violation was dismissed last week.

All big wigs were there, head of planning Sean Kelly, head of code enforcement, Kimberly Scott, all SPAR players, Jack Meeks, Claude Moulton, Louise herself, Chris Farley, a couple of Downings and about a dozen assorted well-healed white people (and white haired) from the neighborhood. Looks like the special master doesn't want to get into the business of protecting their NIMBYISMS. He said they didn't have enough proof that the use was inconsistent and besides "we all shared a house when we were in college, didn't we?"

He sent Sean Kelly back to the drawing board. He has to prove that the ACTUAL use is inconsistent and (since five unrelated ARE allowed to live together -- Sean’s now claiming that it is what the house is USED for that is the problem…ie a sober house). The home owner will have to let him in to do another inspection. But it was a HUGE disappointment for those wishing to clear the neighborhood of such uses.

The huffing and puffing was deafening.

When we left, a LOLA, yelled out to Joe "go ahead, lie some more!!" At which point Joe goes back to them and starts defending himself, and then the man of the LOLA says "get out of her face" and I had to pull Joe away.  (Joe, actually, did not speak at the meeting at all.)   It was all very typically Springfield drama at its finest.

At least the LOLAS were sober this time.

Notably absent were the younger blood of SPAR.

[zoo]

If you want to label me (and go ahead, I'm getting used to being labeled in Jax), it'd be more accurate to call me a NOMIMBYist -- NO More In My Backyard, and clearly there are others in Springfield who feel this way, too.

Sheclown, please tell us how many of your sober houses you have opened/operated in your very own North Shore neighborhood?

[sheclown]

Zoo, my dear, Angi's houses were in operation before YOU moved into the neighborhood.

[AlexS]

Zoo, my dear, Angi's houses were in operation before YOU moved into the neighborhood.

As there was only one house on Perry on the agenda for today, I assume it's this one. How does this relate to "Angi" ?

MCE Case # PICS Case # Property Owner Violation Address Inspector
4.         101204 2010-28929 Kenneth E. Owens 1919 Perry Street Cody

[chris farley]

*

[ChriswUfGator]

Well, the more this stuff keeps happening, the more people realize how Gestapo-like (sorry in advance for breaking Godwin's Law on the 1st page of a thread!) some of these folks really are. What we're all witnessing with all the recent uproars, and DeSpain's resignation, and COJ's obvious and total disregard for anything the usual suspects say, is really the critical mass of an entire mindset getting hoisted on its own petard.

You just don't see this in Riverside (and trust me we have PLENTY of special uses in R'side), and I think it's generally recognized that in a period of turnaround any use at all is better than a vacant and decaying building. Chop that sucker up into as many apartments as you want, who really cares, if it means the thing will still be standing when the area around it improves enough for the inevitable sway of economics to take hold. When the rest of the place improves enough, the owner will sell out and it gets converted to a more appropriate use. That’s the natural course of events.

But at some point, a bunch of them decided they didn’t want to wait for nature to take its course, and that vacant lots were better than a historic building being used for any purpose that they didn't personally like. And, unfortunately, onto this bandwagon of bullshit jumped the executive director of what was supposed to be the neighborhood's historic preservation group. Flashing forward a decade, this more than anything is responsible for so much of Springfield being vacant lots.

If you really wanted to, you could dig up a code violation somewhere for something on pretty much any historic property anywhere in the city. That process is intended to protect public safety, not be used as a tool for harassment and personal agendas. When it gets perverted, as it has been by this group in Springfield, where a small group of yuppies and LOLA’s is calling code-enforcement every 2 minutes, the risk is that the property gets condemned and ultimately demolished. Then everybody loses.

These people have set the place back light-years. Each vacant lot represents a significant increase in the amount of investment required to make that parcel commercially or residentially useful. Instead of being able to drop $100k on renovations, now you’re looking at a $250k new build. The same holds true for commercial property. What these people have done is a travesty, and the more they keep ranting and raving, the more marginalized they will get. They did themselves in. So let them keep acting this way, it just shows everybody else how things are. Which, in the long run, is good.

[nvrenuf]

Why does it matter if the people on either side were white? Why is race being brought in again? I haven't taken a poll or anything but last time I noticed, most if not all of the current tenants at 1919 Perry are also white.

[buckethead]

Why the fuss?

Would anyone prefer a drunkard house to a sober house?

[KuroiKetsunoHana]

Why the fuss?

Would anyone prefer a drunkard house to a sober house?

that was my thought, too.

i'm also (partially) in agreement w/ chrisWUFgator about the empty lots--i'm sick ov seeïng them, and just as sick ov seeïng obviously new homes in what's supposed to be a historic area.

[strider]

First, as Sheclown said, I didn’t even speak, but I guess I am the bane of all things Lola in Springfield. Of course that statement coming from a Lola was sort of laughable as they seem to be the Kings and Queens of misinformation.

And why was Jack Meeks so disappointed that the 3rd street property got taken off the agenda?  Does he and Mack have something planned for that spot on East 3rd?

Nvrenuf, I think since a very recent incident with a major SPAR Council supporter, there has been some amount of evidence that race does have something to do with it after all.

Zoo, are you saying you don't want anymore good neighbors?  Because, it seems that more of the actual neighbors of the sober houses have indicated that they are indeed good neighbors.  In fact, when you think about it, you are more likely to get a good neighbor with an well looked after sober house than a regular rental. Oh, and yes, we have opened some in the past - one of the guys has babysat the grandkid.…the answer to your last question.

And once again we get to hear the incorrect number of legal "special uses" and the fact that there is this elusive list of 16 illegal special uses.  As Sheclown and I have four legal rentals that I have a suspicion are on that list, then one potential house was taken off the agenda today and only one "illegal special use" was heard, and that also seems to have been found legal at this point, what, exactly, is this elusive list?  Is that  list ever going to be made public or is it still only for those select few that are “true believers”.  That is one way to make sure that the truth never comes out, keep it within the group that prays to make their desires of making us illegal comes true.  And is that truly illegal rooming house that is still being advertised on the Proton Therapy website on this “illegal rooming house” list?  Whoops. Sorry, I forgot that if you rent rooms illegally to the right “kind of people“, it’s OK.

It is past time for this nonsense to stop. Want a better Springfield?  Help Louise move and then get rid of the others who can’t seem to get it.  Let’s get some people involved with the local organizations that actually want to find out and know the truth and not some made up and prejudicial wish they may have. Then we all can finally sit down together and make some progress. 

[fsu813]

or....

residents don't want halfway/sober/boarding/rooming houses opening up next to them. for various reasons.

you're gonna have to get rid of almost everyone if you want that to change.

[strider]

Actually, FSU813, you seem to be trying to be part of the problem rather than the fix.  You can't see past the Lola opinions and misinformation and so are doomed to be a problem.  Have you talked to the actual neighbors of any of the sober houses (please note, I am talking sober houses, not illegal rooming houses here) ? Do you know how many there are?  Do you know were they are?  Have you seen this elusive list?  Are you ever going to get that illegal rooming house off the Proton Therapy’s website ...oh, I forgot, some laws don't matter much to you and hey, Proton patients are the right kind of people. Can you possibly get it that by talking and working together rather than just making stuff up and calling your local Lola or code enforcement that Springfield might actually be better off?  That when the truth actually gets out there that all will see that all of this hand wringing over the “illegal special uses” has been for nothing?  That that energy could have and should have been put towards keeping the historic houses and not helping code enforcement tear them down.  That an all inclusive Springfield Community is a much stronger and successful  community than that all exclusive one SPAR Council and the Lolas envision?

[fsu813]

yes, yes. i know. i'm part of the problem.

in fact, anyone who doesn't want a sober/halfway/rooming/boarding/rehab house next to them is part of the problem.

and we're obvious wrong for thinking that way.

probably racist too, as has been implied mulitiple times.

no doubt elitists, that's for sure.

i can't form my own opinions, rather i'm fed info by a neighborhood organization and i regurgitate it.

and i make stuff up (lie) a lot too.

and none of your questions have been addressed/answered before.

think that covers it.

[strider]

You are so right, FSU813, how could I have ever said otherwise.

I will restate:

Can you possibly get it that by talking and working together rather than just making stuff up and calling your local Lola or code enforcement that Springfield might actually be better off?  That when the truth actually gets out there that all will see that all of this hand wringing over the “illegal special uses” has been for nothing?  That that energy could have and should have been put towards keeping the historic houses and not helping code enforcement tear them down.  That an all inclusive Springfield Community is a much stronger and successful  community than that all exclusive one SPAR Council and the Lolas envision?

[Miss Fixit]

Monday lunch time and I just got back from the Special Masters Hearing on "illegal" rooming houses.
The house on Perry Street had been cited as an “illegal rooming house” and was before the Special Masters a quasi-judicial hearing.

The house in question is a tri-plex which currently houses 10 people.

Are sober houses really the issue?  I personally have no problem with sober houses - in fact, I just bought a home next door to one that I have been told is well run with residents that have never caused any problems for the neighborhood.  I don't have any personal (or even second hand) knowledge of problems associated with the house on Perry Street.  However, the property appraiser's database states that the building has 3 bedrooms and 2 baths and 2800 square feet and that it sits on a lot that is 29 feet wide.  Sounds like it is not really suitable housing for 10 people.  I can certainly understand why owners of neighboring properties might not want the traffic (foot or otherwise) and noise associated with ten people living on a 29 foot wide strip of property.