The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC - Public Comments - No Conflict of Interest regarding Group Homes. January 12,2007 City of Newport Beach Attention: Robin Clauson ,City Attorney 3301 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach,CA 42663 Q &e. — lla310 VIA DELIVERY Subject: Verification of No Conflict of Interest concerning Group Rehabilitation/Recovery Facilities aka "Sober Living" or "Group" homes Dear Ms. Clauson: As citizens of Newport Beach, we have,over the past 5 years, requested that the City review the approvals activities,and number and locations of drug rehabilitationhecovery facilities in Newport Beach particuinly on the Balboa Penninsnla. This current request is made based on our concern as citizens of the City that the residential and other character of the community is being adversely impacted by the overproliferation of these facilities. Despite numerous requests,the City has refused to consistently require Use permits and business permits allowed by.law,so as to be aware of and regulate the number and location of these "Sober Living" or group facilities. There are now over 100 drug rehab facilities in a radius of less than 1.5 miles on the Balboa Penninsula with additional facilities recently approved without the proper local zoning, ordinance,and permitting review,and in direct contradiction to the City's General Plan. Due to the aver - saturation of these facilities in such a dense, small residential area, our standard of living, safety; property values and our community as a whole have been adversely impacted. We are at a loss to understand why our City representatives repeatedly indicated in deed and ward that the number and locations of such businesses and facilities cannot be regulated, as we have been assured by the State and other experts consulted that their use review is a matter for Local control.. We hereby insist that the City Attorney's office promptly perform a formal review and provide specific affirmation from the City officials and staff concerning any economic business or personal interest they may have in such business operations or Physical facilities that would interfere with their ability to fulfill their responsibilities and fiduciary duty to the City of Newport Beach citizens. Specifically we are referencing formulation,interpretation and administration of zoning use definition and permittingand other review and approval functions in a manner consistent with various local codes and ordinances;the City's General and specific Plans; and the City's citizens and public interest. ;pest that the results of such an investigation and production of formal individual and collective affidavits be completed and made public within the next 30 days; and, that such affidavits includebut not necessarily be limited to,the following City employees, elected officials, and council or staff - appointed consultants or agents: City Council members Planning Director and staff City Manager and staff Building Inspector and staff Code enforcement personnel City Attorney and staff Fire and Police Dept. Chiefs We appreciate your response within the next 5 days from the date of this correspondence directed to meas addressed below,on behalf of the following City residents. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, ` Lori Mo For: Citizens to Protect Our Penninsula(POP) 208 Y2391" Street Newport Beach CA 92663 Tel. 949- 650 -5619 Attachments: Signature pages - concerned citizens i= 6h 4 A Copy of illustrative correspondence from resident Oberman sent to H. Bludau City Manager with no response dated June 27,2006. Cxh . ,(j Cc: H. Bludau,City Manager -City of Newport Beach S. Rosansky,Mayor -City of Newport Beach Verification of No conflict of Interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name: Signature: 37 y'2 It ,-:e s7- 3 4 S16S77. 391d iii; oe. t1l apt 1,00, - I. \11C.4 6,C1,1q, i. 't A. Ake 7 4 37 y'2 It ,-:e s7- 3 4 S16S77. 391d Verification of No conflict of Interest letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name: Signature. E1o,�v)st mad 3y� — t- We'la A - 2- 390* ey. Verification of No conflict of Interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name: Signature: W A -3 r t ♦ I f T, Tpf i l7 �� I h,. _1.;S� a 'A 1�J i A -3 Verification of No conflict of Interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name: Signature: (•`-q Citi Lo V )51W644 d► VQOwi't' . -z-�411 9LWYLAv� )v d . jf H rO�.,ep- Alve. S-UAI—1 FY A 4� 0 ------ - - ----- ---- (•`-q Verification of No conflict of Interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities N�i3 1, n%Li�S tF- Oc'rt� �c45inC�.S's�s. Name: Signature: 1 V 17-10 < < MA 2 o 'O' , Y� I _E a c._ Oe AWE A - -5 (',cave kl. t2:" .ii f 136 bV 1136 w- cu', tFnbw Iao2yb3:'& lase W jz12 Beau IT 7- w� CPL, t V Verification of No contlict of Interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning f Group/ Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name: Signature: UWW A -G Id . �Jccezu C d FM Urns ...i +si�♦it /��as' `r- ti ♦ / / 1 UWW A -G Id . �Jccezu C d Verification of No conflict of interest Letter Addressed to City Attorney Concerning Group Rehabilitation and Recovery Facilities Name; Signature: A-7- prtt/ l�i�.rybLE� yti@j _ _.. i iI3 1P _R. SY's r'e7 A-7- prtt/ l�i�.rybLE� yti@j Dec 15 06 04:45p OBERMAN _ Strategy and Financial Advisors June 27, 2006 Homer L. Bludau, City Manager City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 Subject: Dear Homer, r• . Z VIA OVERNIGHT am a full -time resident and homeowner in the 1200 West Oceanfront block of Newport Beach. I am writing this letter in response to your summary of City issues and the General Plan in the distribution, "To Fellow Residents ", dated June 12, 2006. We have severat disturbing and damaging trends occurring in the residential areas of Newport Beach, specifically those on the Balboa Peninsula, related to proliferation of Recovery facilities. We areaware of and support the principles of nondiscrimination. This matter has to do with Land Use, Zoning, and specific physical and socioeconomic adverse impacts associated with facilities of 7 occupants or greater. Our area !s a purely residential one. Our immediate surrounds include an elementary schoo; in addition, to regular (not transient) residential demographics. Vie now have 4 Facilities in the West 11 th and 12th Street area alone which each have 7 and greater occupants, at the following locations: 1116 W Balboa: 1132 W. Balboa; 1224 W. Balboa; 1227 W. Balboa. (Please note that this is NOT inclusive of facilities with 6 or fewer occupants, which we may/may not be aware of.) These facilities have common ownership and management, and can definitely be. characterized as CAMPUSES subject to regulation by case law. Fallowing is a list of demonstrated ^,DVERSE IMPACTS DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THIS OVER- CONCENTRATION: ? The traffic, parking and littering to the streets and alleys has significantly worsened. 2. Due to food !ockers and unsanitary conditions, there are now RODENTS. (The manager of the 12'h street facilities confirmed this, and advised us that they are attempting to get rid of them.) 2600 tli,helwr Drive. ioite 1700 • Iry ne, Caldornsa 92612 • Tel 949.)6.0190 fax 94i.752,6975 w .obermanassociates.cem Dec xb u6 04:45p 3. The adjacent and surrounding neighbors, both homeowners and reliable tenants, have begun to move due to the loud, noisy behavior and proliferation of garbage and cigarette butts. We have lost three of our neighbors who live on the oceanfront in front of the facilities, and all of the steady tenants in the apartment buildings next to them. These people cite concerns for sanitation, disgust with litter and vulgarity, and concern for security and child safety. These people have been replaced b t short-term transient renters, who darnage property, express blatant disregard to neighbors with noise and alcohol and drug abuse, and make street parking for regular residents impossible. The Balboa Peninsula is becoming known as an area which tolerates and encourages these facilities as moneymakers. This growing reputation is becoming a deterrent both to new prospective residents, and to other businesses. When residents and business owners have voiced concern with this trend, current and previous City officials and staff (who have conflicts regarding this matter] have whitewashed the matter and attempted to intimidate people with inaccurate information concerning both their rights, and the City's ability to regulate its land uses. We understand that "group tomes" of 6 or fewer occupants are somewhat protected by certain nondiscrimination criteria. I fowever, facilities of the size of 7 or greater have State licensing requirements, as their customers/occupants require certain supervision NOT characteristic of conventional residential uses (or homes of 6 or fewer). Many of these occupants require supervision as a condition of legal parole. The State has advised us that the location of such facilities can be reviewed and controlled by local jurisdiction to assure conformity with zoning and use plans. This management of uses, density, and impacts to meet the parameters of the Gereral Plan and the community is within the City's rights, and is the City's responsibility, REGARDLESS of the tax status of a particular business concern (e.g. the City would expect a hospital, medical center, or other similar business enterprise to obtain a business license and be subject to permitting appropriate to particular location. The Policies of the City, per your letter, include: • "Regulate residential care facilities to the maximum extent allowed by federal and state law to minimize impacts on residential neighborhoods." THE CITY IS NOT DOING THIS. • "Require that residential: units, whether new, renovated or rebuilt, be designed to sustain the high level of architectural design that characterizes Newport Beach's neighborhoods." WELL- MAINTAINED HOUSES AND APARTMENTS AROUND THESE FACILITIES ARE N94V EVOLVING TO A DENSER, DETERIORATED STATE. It is now public knowledge that the Balboa Peninsula ties over 100 Rehab /recovery %cilities, including both the larger facilities subject to regulation, and those with fewer than 7 occupants who may have certain protections, but who regularly use the facilities and services of the larger units, contribiAing to the CAMPUS effect. 2 �Z p.:3