The Observation Deck

Danielle Masters wrote:Not always, after all I am both unemployed and mentally ill...but once again I am one of the lucky. I have people who care about me, sadly not everyone in my situation has that.

Also the same could be said about the elderly. They are old and unemployed and they also use ambulances but I know, I know they are off limits.

Danielle

This is infact the problem with these discussions. None of it is a personal attack, but it is
easy to see how some view it as such.

This is one reason I wanted to make sure people understood the discussion was not about
Lakewoodites that are here now. But a look at to what could be looked at or controlled in
the future.

You are not alone in any of these things or thoughts.

I always laugh when the "Section 8" term is tossed about. I believe that the largest amount
of "Section 8" people are in the Barton Center and Westerly. White, elderly and hopefully
living out a great and productive life in their golden years.

We must always be compassionate, but...

.

Means testing for residency seems far out, but I think a city has to be careful that it maintains a base of taxpayers to pay the bills. In the case under discussion the city will lose residences that could harbor workers who would pay taxes, and one presumes that people who require the services provided by the charity work, if at all, for very low, almost negligible wages. Yet they require the same city services as any resident, so someone else is going to have to pay higher taxes to provide those services. I'm not saying that we should fight to keep these people out, only that there will be a cost to the community. Carried to the extreme, a city with no employed residents (and don't forget that we grant the elderly the same benefit of not paying taxes even though they continue to use city services) would be unable to provide city services, unless we made some dramatic changes in the tax laws.

I feel we all have a societal obligation to care for such people, but it would be nice if the charity that runs the program made an appropriate contribution to the city to replace the lost tax revenue. I believe that government programs in a like situation do made such contributions; I recall that the military made contributions to the towns housing bases, in recognition that the towns had to pay for services for the soldiers and their families, who were generally exempt from taxes.

Even without our current economic difficulties, I think Lakewood is approaching the point where we have too many tax exempt residents (primarily the aged) and not enough young workers to fund municipal services. When I retired, my municipal income tax liability disappeared. A big chunk of my property tax liability disappeared. I get discounts on virtually everything, even RTA. But I do have a decent pension, and could certainly afford to pay at least something for the municipal services I continue to use (in fact, use more now than before I retired).

So my point is that we should certainly be supportive of the disabled, but that we are being too generous to some groups that include people who can afford to pay, and the consequence of this will be more and more reductions in vital municipal services.

I have to go now, my wife has the dog-food patties ready for the grill.

Gary Rice wrote:Additionally, Lakewood currently receives about 2 million dollars annually in HUD funding that my former committee members in the Community Development Block Grant Committee review. These funds can assist our community in dealing with questions like these.

Wonderful.

Community block grants that are now used to repair streets and sidewalks, to repair infrastructure, to attract business and create jobs will now be used to provide extra welfare payments to the homeless who are moved here as part of a “Homeless Resettlement Program”.

If sharing a City with people of different income levels, life styles or colors bothered me I’d be living in a place like Bay Village or Avon Lake with the majority of Lakewood’s City employees and teachers. But even I have my limits.

When the young Mrs. Who takes her daughter to the Lakewood Library and sees one of the newly resettled homeless standing in a corner with his pants around his ankles will she say, “Don’t worry Betty Lou Who, that’s just his way of saying hello”. Or will she be thinking, “Maybe North Ridgeville isn’t so far after all”.

What kind of City will you have when the last taxpayer leaves Lakewood?

There are several points that need to be made here, I do believe.

The obvious first point would be that anyone caught breaking a law, here, or anywhere, will be dealt with accordingly.

A second point would be that, (for example) percentage-wise, after a long career in the field of special education, I would say with confidence that I don't think that I had any greater percentage of my students get into trouble with authorities, than the general student population as a whole did. To suggest that a certain element of any population would disproportionately be law-breakers would be to paint with a very broad brush indeed; and in my opinion, comes very close to a slippery slope that we do not want to start sliding down.

As Jim alluded to with the potential racism charges that could have come into play on another thread, there would also be the possibility of discrimination charges against the less fortunate, IF our city would act in an overly hostile or unfair manner towards such a group. If proven, those kinds of things could come with very unhealthy court fines and remedies.

That could be a slippery slope indeed, that our city does not want to slide down.

The good news again, would be that people in need often do have a money stream already in place for their needs.

By the way, groups public and private must apply for those CDBG funds. They are not automatically doled out to all who ask. Also, only a part of CDBG funds can be applied to public works. There are specific trails of accountability that must apply to their usage.

While having a good base of taxpaying local residents is certainly of paramount importance to our city, I would also like to make the point that those who might not be wading as deeply as others in that stream, contribute to our city in countless ways sublime, at times intangible, and utterly important- in ways other than financially.

One example of this, (quite quantifiable too, by the way, for those who appreciate facts ) would be the documented thousands of senior volunteer hours clocked by the Office on Aging. Without those volunteers, our city would truly see a reduction in the all-important quality-of-life issues that affect us all.

As a final point, Lakewood employees and teachers, by law, live wherever they want to. Their commitment to Lakewood is through a contracted negotiated agreement that does not include a residency requirement, and, as the courts have ruled, cannot include such an agreement. My own commitment to my students, throughout my own career in another district for example, did not depend on where I, or they lived.

Back to the banjo...

Danielle,
Like Ed, I have great respect for your honesty and courage in your road. When I think of you I don't think anything other than a passionate and dedicated mother and neighbor in this town. In a country filled with high profile people dying regularly from overdoses, I think mental illness is a broad range and can affect anyone at different times in their lives. Many parents find children in their teens and even twenties who are stricken with Schizophrenia out of nowhere. And depression hits many teenagers and mothers with drastic hormones in a difficult time. Teen suicide as we all read, seems everywhere. So there for the grace of God go I, we all can think.

Reading the deck is sometimes like watching Dateline or 20/20, the first half can get you all riled up and with a formed opinion, then the second half comes up and you start questioning things. I, like you and Gary adn others, would never want to discriminate on the basis of health for anyone in need of a safe place to live. Jim does bring up some valid points though, and I think transparency and truth have to accomodate housing situations for groups coming to live in Lakewood. Violent teens would simply not get my vote. And of course sex offenders or those with criminal pasts, or a prison, unless they want to put it in a gated community. As far as the building not being up to code, that should be mandatory with all rental income going directly to the back taxes which would help Lakewood. Or make the landlord live there until it is paid up, like Judge Caroll did to another landlord.

That being said, I just landed my dream job, which happens to be working with children with mental/emotional disorders. Knowing these children could face joblessness, homelessness, and discrimination one day will push me even harder to help them overcome their obstacles and achieve success, which can be done.

Congratulations on your new job, Justine!

You'll probably want to let me know some of the details, one of these days.

I think that those in your care will be fortunate to have your assistance.

Best wishes to you, and to those in your care!

Any special-needs program requires accountability and oversight. I don't think anyone wants sub-standard care or services to adversely affect the less fortunate or those around them, whether that would be in Lakewood, or anywhere else.

Back to the banjo...

Justine,

Congratulations of your new job. You've worked hard to get to this point and I know after many conversations with you that you will do an amazing job. You know my history and you know the history of my two boys and I am so glad that there are wonderful people like you out there willing to work with special needs children.

And Bill, thanks for providing your list of questions. I look forward to a response from MHS.

Danielle

Thank you Danielle and Gary and Gary yes I want coffee to tell you all about it! It is a privilege to teach people's children and a privilege to teach the disabled. I know Danielle, that mothering children with special needs is only given to the strong and dedicated like you. I know you refer to yourself as mentall ill to advocate for the mentally ill, but we are what we label ourselves. Call yourself a strong coping mom. That is the only label you need.

Bill,
We all appreciate your questions and hope for answers.

Justine Cooper wrote:Bill,
We all appreciate your questions and hope for answers.

The answers omitted will tell us more than the answers submitted.

There is more here than meets the eye.

See this:

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index. ... _econ.html

The first sentence gives a hint of what is at stake:

"The reason the city of Cleveland is dying is simple: Not enough people who are not poor want to live here, and not enough vibrant businesses want to be here."

Food for thought:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/opinion/09ehrenreich.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Charyn Compeau wrote:Food for thought:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/opinion/09ehrenreich.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Excellent article.

This is also from New York:

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ny ... 02940.html

When MHS decided to bus the homeless from Tremont to Lakewood what was their motivation? If a resident did not want to move was he offered alternative housing in Tremont? If their former residence was so substandard why are other federally funded agencies still housing people in that building? Should all of the area's homeless be moved to Lakewood? Should the Housing Resettlement Program include other cities or just Lakewood? Who makes the decision?

Some might think I asked MHS too many questions. I had more and actually cut it short.

For me, this article screams prevention over reaction. We have it backwards in this country. We cut out services for the most disabled in this country, shutting down mental hospitals and services for them and then complain that we have to do anything when they are on the streets or commmitting crimes.

Justine Cooper wrote:I know you refer to yourself as mentally ill to advocate for the mentally ill, but we are what we label ourselves. Call yourself a strong coping mom. That is the only label you need.

Danielle

I agree with Justine on this.

The answer is simple.

Housing stock.


.

On a mental health note, the documentary "Uninterrupted Boy" which was taken by parents of a 15 yo boy with bi-polar who committed suicide, is a remarkable and heartbreaking honest look into mental illness and the pain and tragedy that comes with it. I would recommend it to anyone wanting to understand mental illness from a family's perspective.

Kate McCarthy wrote:My concern is the inappropriateness of the Oak Tree Manor for the program. The description of the program at Kingsway Manor on the website seems in contradiction to the program briefly described in the email shared by Kevin. The website describes “intensive treatment and supportive services” and employs the “clubhouse model of psychosocial rehabilitation” where the residents support each other and regularly meet together with staff. How that model will be successfully employed in a rundown apartment building near bars and railroad tracks is beyond me. Seems to me these residents are literally being dumped by MHS into an apartment building not suitable for their needs.

Excellent point.

Mental Health Services loaded the residents of Kingsway Manor on to busses and then dropped them off at Oak Tree Manor. The actual presence of the staff of Mental Health Services will consist of having an office in the building. Is Mental Health Services in the business of "psychosocial rehabilitation" or in the business of warehousing? I have some questions about their business model that I didn't ask in my original query.

I asked for an update last week about answers to my questions and I haven't received an answer. I will ask again today. Mr. Morse indicated an "eagerness" to answer questions so I sure we will receive something soon. His answers will be posted here.