.
.
.
[AUTHOR’S NOTE: This story has been revised due to a correction in the address of the site in question. The site address was taken off of Google Maps and Thursday night and used to create all of the earlier maps; someone reported the error to Google on Friday, they revised it, and this post now contains revised maps and somewhat revised analysis. — GAD]
“We South OC Mayors have the jurisdiction to put the homeless in any of our cities? Well, today, our jurisdiction ends here! Let’s put them in Silverado, a not-actually South OC community — in fact, quite a distant one, politically weak and governed by the county!”
(1) “South County’s Contribution”
Federal District Court Judge David Carter is turning up the heat on all levels of Orange County government to find a place where the homeless can live both short-term and long. So when the Mayors of South Orange County met yesterday in San Clemente — as described in this Voice of OC story, from which we’ll quote at length — what is the most dastardly proposal that you can imagine they could make in response?
How about proposing that South County’s contribution be a “South County” site that doesn’t have a Mayor — an unincorporated community! Good start — a place without a Mayor! But it’s not nearly dastardly enough: keep going.
Well, if it’s going to be an unincorporated community, how about making sure that it’s not one with a lot of actual or potential big donors — a Coto, a Newport Coast, a Three Arch Bay (or one of the others with a Community Services District along the coast)? Or maybe choose one that’s a step or so down, like a Ladera Ranch or a Las Flores? Well, yes, they did do that — but their no doubt amply rewarded evil genius advisors had something much better in mind.
“South County’s contribution” was to propose a homeless shelter in isolated, middle-class, politically powerless Silverado — in a former elementary school that currently houses a library and pre-school serving the community and environs.
Well, what’s so bad about that? A library and a preschool can be moved, after all. And it may be class discrimination to suggest that the least influential and least affluent unincorporated community around be the one to absorb what the rest of the region doesn’t want — but that’s normal politics, right?
Right, but we haven’t gotten to the best part, the part that makes this a genius masterstroke of callow and disingenuous NIMBYism. Ready for it?
The proposed site, Silverado Elementary School, isn’t functionally in South County at all!
Here — look at a map!
Silverado is the northernmost of OC’s east-of-the-55 canyons. We often speak of “the canyons” as being within South OC — and further to the south, they clearly are. But South OC is generally considered to be Lisa Bartlett’s Supervisorial District 5 — whence almost all of the cities represented at the meeting were located — and maybe some of the southern half of Todd Spitzer’s Supervisorial District 3 and maybe maybe the southernmost part of Michelle Steele’s District 2. But Silverado is in the northern half of Spitzer’s district — definitely not South OC. Here are the boundaries of the Supervisorial districts for your reference:
From the OC Registrar of Voters website — so you know that (unlike some maps online) it’s current!
Silverado Canyon is a bit northeast of where that big “3” is.
(I was just kidding when I said you could imagine anyone doing this. For most of us, this level of gall-saturated perfidy would be beyond imagining.)
We’re going to lovingly review the details in what follows, to make the case that “South County’s contribution” would functionally be placed on the tab of Tustin, Orange, Anaheim Hills, and Villa Park. (It is not that far from the northernmost South OC cities — Irvine, Lake Forest, and Rancho Santa Margarita — but only if one takes the toll roads, which it’s a safe bet that the homeless do not.) That’s simply not South County’s own “contribution” to offer, not much more than if they had proposed a site in San Diego or Riverside Counties.
Now, I’ll readily admit: I enjoy the prospect of a huge fight between two of the wealthiest and NIMBYest parts of the county — the wealthy communities from Yorba Linda, Anaheim Hills, Villa Park, and the hills of unincorporated Orange and Tustin, on the one hand, and the coast south of Laguna Beach to San Clemente, on the other — as much as the next person does. (Probably more.) But given that NIMBYism is the enemy here — and it is — no part of the county should be able to get away with shunting their share of the obligation onto another one — at least without paying a HUUUUGE price for it . (After all, I know where that game of “hot potato” ends: with indesirable obligations being dumped in North, Central, and maybe part of West County.) This tactic must be nipped in the bud.
But IS this so unfair of South County? Tell you what, in the section just after the one that follows, we’ll look at a lot more maps. I can’t resist the urge to “bury the lede” here, so delicious it is, but I’ll put it in big bold orange text below so that you if you’re willing to at least skim downward you can’t miss it. But first, let’s review that Voice of OC article.
(2) The Meeting of the Mayors
(I’m quoting liberally from the Voice of OC story, so please click one of my links to it so that they don’t get mad at me, although the following contains some of my own observations not found therein.)
- Judge David Carter had pressured Mayors of the 12 cities in South Orange County to meet yesterday to find a site for a new homeless shelter. Carter had told the Mayors that if they could not come up with a site, he was inclined to “follow the law” and strike down their anti-camping ordinances.
- Those 12 cities are Aliso Viejo, Dana Point, Irvine, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods, Lake Forest, Mission Viejo, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, and San Juan Capistrano.
- Also attending the meeting in San Clemente were Supervisor Lisa Bartlett, a representative of South County state Sen. Pat Bates, OC’s CEO Frank Kim and homelessness czar Susan Price, and retired Superior Court Judge James L. Smith and two law clerks representing Judge Carter’s court.
- The Mayors chose the county-owned former Silverado Elementary School, which now houses the Library of the Canyons and the Silverado Children’s Center, a preschool.
- The site is in unincorporated (i.e., county-governed) territory, 2-1/2 miles west of Silverado itself, roughly bordering unincorporated North Tustin and unincorporated Orange.
- According to Irvine Mayor Don Wagner, if the Silverado site was first adopted and Judge Carter wanted more beds, three of south county mayors might accept smaller sites for 10 to 20 people each.
- The Mayors will jointly propose the Silverado Elementary School site to the county today, seeking help to work out the details.
- Lake Forest Mayor Jim Gardner was the only one to oppose the proposal in a 10-1 vote, with Mission Viejo Mayor Ed Sachs having left the meeting early, due to its proximity to a preschool and remote location. “It’s in the middle of nowhere and it’s on a dangerously fast road that already has a history of accidents.”
- Irvine Mayor Wagner said that the remoteness of the site was not a problem — implying that it might even be a plus: “A number of the south county cities might be willing to help with the transportation aspect if that’s a viable site. And I’m sure my constituents would be much happier with us helping transport to a site that isn’t in Irvine, as opposed to saying, ‘Hey let’s do it at the Great Park.’ I think that’s true of most of the communities, if not all of them, in south county. So that remote [location] issue, a lot can be done to alleviate that concern.”
- Gardner also noted that he proposed shelter site is within the district of Supervisor Todd Spitzer’s district, who either was not invited to or did not attend the meeting, rather than Bartlett’s, which he described as “a funny little twist on things.”. The Voice says that Spitzer didn’t reply to a message seeking comment, perhaps as to how funny he found this twist.
- Spitzer’s having the site shunted into his own district may have resulted from his own actions, which seem related to his campaign for a countywide position as District Attorney. Spitzer, who had spearheaded the removal of homeless from the Santa Ana River sites, was criticized by his colleagues for having gone into other districts to foment opposition to emergency shelter sites in Laguna Niguel (Bartlett’s district) and Costa Mesa (Steel’s.)
- Gardner, a clinical psychology Ph.D., said that he wanted to see the sites split up into smaller ones throughout south county. “I think the problem … is that they are trying to create a large site, a large shelter, rather than distribute the population evenly throughout the county in small numbers where they wouldn’t be noticed,” Gardner said, adding that the large grouping approach “was already discarded 50 years ago.
- Gardner also stated: “This is just the mayors and their opinion. That honestly holds no weight. The mayors have to go back to their cities and get the support [from the councils]. It’s very exploratory at this point,” Gardner added. “So there’s no reason to assume that this is the final outcome, but this is what’s being advocated now.”
- However, shunting the problem to the eastern edges of Central County near the border of North County would likely be a popular choice among South County City Council members — if they are allowed to get away with it.
(3) But Is This Really Shunting the Obligation Out of South County?
I realize that there may be some skepticism out there. Sure, Silverado is in Todd Spitzer’s district rather than Lisa Bartlett’s, but it’s still a canyon, so why shouldn’t canyon-crammed South OC get credit for “doing its part” by proposing a homeless shelter there? Fair question. I do have an answer — but you’re going to have to look at a lot of maps!
Let’s start with exactly where the proposed site — which I’ll still call “Silverado Elementary” is:
Not much in Silverado makes it onto the maps, but there is the Silverado Cafe, at the right of the above map, which more or less let’s you know where the community is. And the small number or streets give you a hint as to its size, while the green surrounding it indicates its rural character.
The former Silverado Elementary School contains the Library of the Canyons and — if Google can now be trusted on this — is about 100 yards south of the Silverado Children’s Center. As you may imagine, the proximity of both a library and a nursery school to Silverado is not exactly something to sneeze at. Taking them away will significantly undercut the social services provided to at least residents there with children.
But the bigger question — which you can’t answer from the above maps — is this: what’s it near? If you’re a NIMBY, you don’t want the homeless to be near you (although their being near other people’s children far away is fine.) This is based on the widespread belief — fanned by some local officials, as discussed below, that the homeless are especially dangerous, which doesn’t seem to be the case.
Here’s how to get from Silverado Elementary to the cities around it — and not so close to it, in the case of much of South County.
Villa Park — ~ 12 miles, 16 minutes (in clear traffic)
The site is 12 miles, or 16 minutes (in clear traffic) from Villa Park City Hall. (Note that the time measurements for all of these maps were taken in the wee hours after midnight, so they would be greater to everywhere during the day. The distance measurements, less so.) [NOTE: the error in Google Maps had it about 4 miles and 4 minutes closer to this site.]
While one might reasonably locate Silverado Elementary in proximity to Santiago Canyon College — a 10 minute drive away and not a bad place for panhandling, I’m guessing (at least probably better than the Silverado Grill) — and unincorporated Orange Park Acres, the nearest City Hall (which I’m using a proxy for distance to a city center) is that celebrated center of South Orange County … Villa Park. (If you’re not already laughing at this, consult the top map at you’ll see that the latitude of Villa Park is south of the 91 but north of most of Anaheim.)
So IF you’re a NIMBY, and IF you (wrongly) think that the homeless are inherently or even especially predatory, then it’s Santiago Canyon College, Orange Park Acres, maybe North Tustin, and maybe Villa Park that would have to worry about their sheltering at the Silverado Elementary site. These are all VERY FAR AWAY from South County.
I could probably stop right there — SILVERADO ELEMENTARY IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO SOUTH COUNTY AND SOUTH COUNTY MAYORS PROPOSING IT AS A SHELTER SITE IS SIMPLY A MATTER OF DISPLACING THEIR OBLIGATIONS ONTO NORTH AND CENTRAL COUNTY, YET AGAIN — but since we’re here anyway, before you skip down to the last section, let’s beat this horse not only to death, but into the glue jar. I promise there’s a treat in it for you at the end.
In clear traffic, Silverado Elementary is … and let’s do North County first …
… 17 miles (the southern route, the caption for which doesn’t appear in this resolution), and 22 minutes in clear traffic, from what passes for Yorba Linda City Hall.
… under 23 miles, and 28 minutes, from Brea City Hall (etc.)
… under 32 miles, and 33 minutes, to far-flung La Habra City Hall.
OK, what about other places in Central County? Silverado Elementary is …
… 13 miles and 20 minutes to Tustin City Hall.
… under 15 miles and about 20 minutes to Orange City Hall.
… about 20 miles, and 27 minutes, from Anaheim City Hall.
… about 18 and 23 minutes from Santa Ana City Hall.
OK, OK … but maybe it’s still close to SOUTH County, right? Let’s start with the relatively close, but not typical of South County, Irvine …
… it’s about 15 miles, and 19 minutes, by toll road — which, again, the homeless seem unlikely to take, given their poverty — and (not shown) 16.4 miles and 22 minutes by free roads (Santiago Canyon to Jamboree.) (Note that Irvine is unusual among South OC cities in that one can get there readily from this site on free roads.)
How about Lake Forest? Not bad — under 10 miles and 14 minutes.
… under 11 miles and 13 minutes from Rancho Santa Margarita, — but that’s if they use the Toll Road, as most homeless people likely do not. Otherwise — well, my mapping program refused to provide a non-toll-road path even on the “avoid tolls” setting. I had to plot a map to RSM’s In ‘n’ Out Burger — a plausible destination for the homeless — to get a non-toll route of 11 miles and 15 minutes.
Let’s look at Mission Viejo: 12.4 miles, 18 minutes
What about Capistrano?
… whew! It’s 20 miles and 26 minutes!
Finally, what about the City Hall in the city where the Mayors met, San Clemente? It’s 27.2 miles away at best, and 33 minutes at best. Further than Yorba Linda or Brea — although, as one would expect from a South OC city proposing a site as its South OC contribution to a countywide problem, at least it’s slightly closer than La Habra!
Funny thing about this: I tested a few other OC cities that I thought might be further away from the proposed site than San Clemente and Capistrano — and La Habra is the only one I could fine. San Clemente is about as far away from the proposed site by road as you can get in Orange County.
That’s right: San Clemente is the second-furthest City Hall within Orange County from Silverado Elementary.
I’ve made you a nice chart to summarize these results:
Distance from South County’s proposed Silverado Elementary site:
- Lake Forest: 10 miles, 14 minutes
- Rancho Santa Margarita: 11 miles, 15 minutes (avoiding tolls)
- Villa Park: 12 miles, 16 minutes (in clear traffic, as is true of all cities)
- Mission Viejo: 12 miles, 18 minutes
- Tustin: 13 miles, 20 minutes
- Orange: 15 miles, 20 minutes
- Irvine: 16 miles, 22 minutes (avoiding tolls)
- Yorba Linda: 17 miles, 22 minutes
- Santa Ana: 18 miles, 23 minutes
- San Juan Capistrano: 20 miles, 26 minutes
- Anaheim: 20 miles, 27 minutes
- Brea: 23 miles, 28 minutes
- San Clemente 27 miles, 33 minutes
- La Habra: 32 miles, 33 minutes
Admittedly, this is a crude measure for many reason — not including all cities, using the City Hall rather than population center, using travel times in clear traffic rather than when the homeless are likely to be traveling, factoring in the desirability of each city for the homeless, and more — and most of all we need the caution that it looks only at the effect of this one site, where others (especially in Fullerton, Anaheim, and Santa Ana) to some extent discharge those cities’ and regions’ “anti-NIMBY” obligations even without this proposal. This sort of study should be done more formally and by, ahem, someone other than a volunteer. But if the findings by and large hold up, as seems likely, we can reach a few conclusions:
First, to the extent that proximity to a homeless shelter, encampment, or whatnot imparts a burden on a community — and that’s certainly how the NIMBYs in the county see it! — this proposal doesn’t do much to discharge the communal obligation faced by South County. It should be credited to Irvine (especially its northern section) and Lake Forest, and to lesser extents to RSM and Mission Viejo, but not far beyond that.
Second, to give any anti-NIMBY credit to San Juan Capistrano and especially to San Clemente is downright obscene. This discharges essentially nothing of their anti-NIMBY obligations.
Third, the eastern portions of Central County — Villa Park, Orange, and Tustin — and Yorba Linda get more anti-NIMBY credit than the South OC average.
Fourth, the county owes Silverado itself a whole lot of needed services if this goes through. Pass the bill on to San Clemente.
(4) MOST Every Mayor Except Mayor Gardner Deserves a “Bench Slap”
The former Silverado Elementary School may well be a good site — or it may just be a cynical way to dump the problem on one of the least politically powerful communities in the county — but there’s no way in the world (or at least in the county) that South County should get credit for it being its contribution to alleviating county homelessness. For South County Mayors to propose it as their contribution is a particularly pernicious act of NIMBYism. (I don’t say that because I think that cities should be competing to shunt the homeless off to others, but simply that they are doing so — and the South County Mayors yesterday did so in one of the most pernicious and deceitful ways imaginable.)
I don’t know exactly what Judge Carter’s specific instructions were (presuming that there were any) to the South County Mayors — but I presume that they were something along the lines of “inform the court what you propose to do to help alleviate this countywide problem.” If so, then for South County to propose Silverado Elementary School as their offering to pay off their NIMBYism bill approaches being a carefully plotted fraud on the court — and Judge Carter should respond to it with something called a “bench slap.” This might include fining the cities proposing this sham and putting the proceeds into a fund to actually address the issue — and then require each of the city making the proposal to come up with space within its own borders as its proposal.
Problem solved!
But there’s another problem, and this is that — by proposing an at least largely Central-County based solution in response to the court’s request for solutions in their area, rather than NIMBYism — every South County Mayor but Jim Gardner of Lake Forest acted in bad faith. Unless the Court wants to see more of that — because there’s more in store — Judge Carter should sanction those Mayors and impose a suspension of their cities’ anti-camping ordinances until they present a good-faith plan. (With summer weather upon us, I think that San Clemente and SJC have already crossed that line.)
From the perspective of the rest of Orange County, what the South OC Mayors have done here — delighting their NIMBYs by choosing the furthest site away from most of their population that could even arguably be depicted as close enough to constitute “their contribution” — is unacceptable. (I’m not backing off entirely from calling it “atrocious.”) While other regions of the county have — however grudgingly at times — operated in good faith, they have tried to play the Court for a fool.
But Judge Carter is no fool. I hope that he lowers the boom on them.
Nice job, Greg.
LOVE LOVE LOVE the article. The only thing is that the school (or now Library of the Canyons) is only about about 3/4 of a mile from the entrance to Silverado Cyn.
AND, I hope that the judge sees right through them, and their arrogance. They didn’t even bother to tour the facility to know about the Children’s Center being on the very same piece of property. The mayor of Irvine even said on the radio that “There isn’t a city and there wasn’t a mayor of that area there to say ‘Hey, hey, not in my backyard,'” (said Irvine Mayor Donald Wagner).
The judge should do just as you said – and I hope to God he does.
Wagner really said that on the radio? He’s always been a prick.
House them at the James A. Musick facility in Irvine. It’s safe and secure for all concerned the Unsheltered and the Residents.
Why reinvent the wheel? Irvine has a spot that is already zoned for homeless. Put the homeless in Irvine and make it an actual city for once in its manicured life!
Great write up.
Thanks, Ryan and Frank. TLee, the Musick facility is a jail — so is your plan to arrest the homeless? Sort of pricey, along with being in humane … unless … hey, are you a prison guard?
Mr. Diamond, you are correct it is a jail facility that is also a honor farm. The Unsheltered can stay at the farm away from the light weight jail population housed at the honor farm. And also I’m not a OCSD Deputy or a CDC Guard.
We do need to figure out where to house the sex offenders and repeat offenders who don’t fit into neighborhoods, and while I don’t want to arrest them, is there a way to convert a section of a law enforcement facility into housing units for those populations unable to live in residential areas because of the restrictions for their placement? They would not be imprisoned, could come and go of their own free will, but we could make use of some of that space not currently used at Santa Ana jail or Musick. The proximity to law enforcement and knowing how quickly they could be snapped back up again may act as a deterrent to re-offending. Just a thought.
Why, on God’s green earth, do we need to figure out anything special for those required to register as sex offenders? How do they not “fit” into neighborhoods? How are they unable to live in residential areas – and what in what areas should they “reside”? Of what restrictions regarding their residency / placement do you speak?
What you are suggesting sounds very much like imprisonment. And if proximity / a jail setting may act as a deterrent to re-offending, why not use it for all those with criminal convictions? Or if it may serve as a deterrent to offending in the first place, why not apply it to all homeless citizens(!) / residents?
Perhaps you could offer some substance and logic for your comments – popular they may be with the NIMBYs and OC Supervisors. Just a thought.
There was 1 sex offender out of several hundred at the River Bed most all sex offenders live in homes in your area. Check Megans law for those living near you.
1/3 of all Americans were arrested something other than a traffic violation before they are 23.
Many in U.S. Are Arrested by Age 23, Study Finds
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/us/nearly-a-third-of-americans-are-arrested-by-23-study-says.html
Look at every third neighbor by this study and know that they were arrested for something other than a traffic violation.
By federal standards you need housing with wrap around services to succeed. They must be near jobs, food and health services.
And why does this one homeless person at the river location deserve special mention? And for some reason be representative for thousands of people in Orange County and over one hundred thousand in the state? EXACTLY what actual conduct has s/he engaged in to deserve such notoriety and importance?
No, the point is ONE PERSON OUT OF HUNDREDS is statistically insignificant, and a rate you’d never expect from the fearmongering of Todd Spitzer and other NIMBY politicos.
And they are known to law enforcement, and won’t be housed carelessly in a tent city next to an elementary school the way these people have been screaming.
All of your maps except the last one have the wrong Santiago Elementary, which is way east of the toll road.
Awwwwwwwwwwww . . .
No, the actual remoteness is even greater.
The old school on Santiago Canyon Rd. was purchased by the County’s Redevelopment Agency in 2011-12 thanks to Wild Bill Campbell who obviously had some scamology going on. The Cal DOF let the County get away with it.
Seriously, if you can’t trust Google, who CAN you trust? Anyway, the thesis is still mostly intact, although a bit attenuated. My language in revising it has followed suit.
It’s still an absolutely cost-free accommodation for South County. The homeless people at this site — presuming that they would prefer to avoid paying tolls — would still head north, west, and northwest to sightsee and mingle, or whatever the NIMBYs are concerned about their doing.
It’s not “the wrong Santiago Elementary” — there’s only one of them hereabouts, at least on Google — it’s that until sometime Friday Google had the wrong address for it. (Hence my having the correct information on the one map that I redid on Friday to update the traffic and travel time information.) Thanks for the info and your omniscience.
The School is Silverado elementary, not Santiago Elementary. And it’s no longer in elementary school, it’s a library. The Silverado Library was moved from the center of town, to this location. It’s brand new —it hasn’t even been open for a year.
I personally think if the mayors of South Orange county believe a library is an adequate site for a homeless shelter—then they ought to offer up a percentage of all their libraries across the entire county, to house homeless people.
The not in my backyard arrogance of choosing this site is astonishing. What makes this library better than all the other libraries? They all have them.
Sorry, as you’ll see from the maps, I did use the correct name. I was unthinkingly following David Zenger’s usage of the term “Santiago Elementary” from the comment to which I was replying.
Agreed on the rest. If Silverado was willing to give this site up in exchange for concessions from the county, I don’t know that it would be a bad idea — but I do know that its being “South County’s contribution to a solution” is somewhere between inane and insane.
No, you were unthinkingly using the wrong Mapquest maps that showed a school in east Orange/ Orange Park Acres called “Santiago” – ten miles west of the school on Santiago Road.
Get out more.
The maps speak for themselves, and the old version is posted. They label the site exactly as I typed it in. You can find it in the “Font of Wisdom” list below, though it’s not in the list of articles above because I want to minimize its public circulation. Every last one says “Silverado Elementary School,” not “Santiago Elementary School.” So how did I pull off that trick?
Why should “they” not be housed next to an elementary school if that is where the shelter ends up being?
Why won’t “they” be housed “carelessly” – when apparently murderers and drug dealers and wife / child beaters and thieves and burglars warrant a lesser level of care?
Why are “they” known to law enforcement when murderers and drug dealers and wife / child beaters and thieves and burglars are not? I know I know, the law, but why is that?
I guess it comes down to “sex offenders” being extra scary to John Q Public, especially John Q with kids.
We’re not gonna change that here and now, while trying to house the homeless.
But some of those homeless are required to register as sex offenders. Even if it is one. Either try and house’em all or none. No cherry picking.
If you are willing to discard and cast aside him or them, I lost interest in helping the rest of this population.
Why should he / they not be entitled to the same assistance as any other citizen? Because of John Q. Public’s misconceptions, fanned by the opportunisti OC Supes and hysterics like Cynthia Ward? If we deprive one citizen for no valid reason, we all lose.
And what better time to change this than now, what better place than here?
I think that the sex-offender registry it abused in a lot of ways — most clearly when applied to public urination by the homeless and others — but I just don’t see holding a decent resolution hostage to changing deeply entrenched attitudes about it, which demagogues are certain to exploit for political gain. If someone wants to start a civil rights lawsuit over it, fine, but addressing this issue can’t wait on a (probably unlikely) positive result.
@Greg Diamond,
I am going to assume that you know that public urination is not a crime. If and when relieving oneself in public rises to the level of Indecent Exposure per the CA Penal Code, a registerable sex crime, I fail to see how the housing status of a person is a factor. After all, all sex crimes are (by definition) heinous, damage the victim for a lifetime and those committing them are almost guaranteed to continue this type of criminal conduct in perpetuity (sarcasm). Hence the need for the sex offender registry for a weeny wagger or a guy who had a 17 year old girlfriend whom he later married, while a convicted murderer who has served his criminal sentence has no registration requirement whatsoever. For you to rationalize a sex crime because the perpetrator has no fixed domicile is sort of bizarre.
As far as achieving a decent and positive result…. I am curious as to how many individuals can be thrown under the bus – not for legal reasons but for mob sentiment – and still get that done.
If one guy is excluded from the shelters and possibly subjected to alternate accommodations more reminiscent of incarceration (hellooooo, separate but equal!) – is that okay? 1 out of 400 is .25%. Not bad, you say. What if it 4 individuals? Is 1% still positive and decent? What if it is 200 individuals? 50% still okay? 399 out of 400? What is that magic number that keeps us in the decent and positive realm?
It goes without saying that, for the 1 guy who is excluded, this result is 100% crappy. As it is for the rest of us who believe in the Constitution.
So, what is that magic number of people / tax payers excluded from publicly funded amenities for a historic criminal conviction – that a convicted murderer is not subject to – that keeps us in the decent and positive realm? Perhaps your concept of decency is different from mine.
Daisy, if the police officer making the arrest wants to deem an act of public urination as indecent exposure, and the prosecutors agree to prosecute, then yes the person will go onto the sex offenders registry. I’ve had a couple of people contact me to see if I could arrange removal; with a new statute in place I may take some of those cases.
Why does this apply disproportionately to the homeless? Well, they don’t have bathrooms, get it? In fact, the recent rise in public interest in this issue started (if memory serves) with the drive to remove public bathrooms from near the homeless encampments by the riverbed. Why? It was OC’s “termite treatment” philosophy regarding the homeless: “you don’t need to eradicate them, you just need to get them to go someplace else.”
Is any of this really news to you?
Bad information Bad Maps Bad Article.
If this is an error. Correct it. If it is propaganda , you are not helping.
It is not propaganda. I used the address for Silverado Elementary School that was available on Google Maps that ws available on Thursday night, which they apparently corrected once the error was reported on Friday. The article has been revised in light of Google Maps now having the correct address. The previous article has been archived until a different URL (so that you’d have to be intent on finding it to look at it) so that people can see the original maps and data.
Clayton…. you must live in Irvine!
Comically some are even pitching the Los Pinos camp – a former Probation facility truly in the back of beyond.
Sooner or later people are going to get sick of foolish, selfish, incompetent, feckless imbeciles voted into office. But probably not soon.
Thanks for noticing that Silverado is not in South County, a fact which seems to escape many. The Silverado site could work if it is self contained and a longer term facility not used as a “sleep & kick out” where those using the facility check in each night, receive a meal, can clean up, sleep and are then kicked out to wander without somewhere to go during the day. Silverado could be used as a long term facility for families (with the adult men included) or for seniors or those needing a more protected environment with the services needed, including transportation to school or work provided. The quiet and secluded environment could be helpful.
That approach makes a lot of sense — but, as you note, it is not South County’s to make as a way of discharging its own obligations to the rest of the county.
I hadn’t even known of the oclafco “sphere of influence” material that you have mentioned; that should be of great interest to the court!
NO The Silverado site could not work. Not only is literally right across the field from the preschool, but it’s on a septic tank system not a sewer system. It cannot support even 100 people or even 50 at that site — let alone 400. Are the mayors of all the cities going to pay to bring a sewer system out to Silverado Canyon?
As long as you’re at it, please bring reliable Internet, cable, and cell phones. No one’s even talked about that.
Then there’s the fact the library is located on a road that’s 55 miles an hour, and had 17 deaths last year. I can’t imagine how much worse it will be if people are trucking services back-and-forth, people are walking along a road with no shoulder in many areas & doesn’t even have any area to walk, they certainly can’t ride their bike to work like they could’ve at the riverbed… and they can’t cross over the mountain into Silverado Canyon, because all the property behind the library is the preserve and those trails can’t be opened up. To get to the little Silverado town, they’d have to go several miles on a 55 mile an hour road, around the mountain.
Then there’s the fire danger. This area is a high fire danger. There is only one way in and out of Silverado, on the large they never rode that used to be a wagon Trail. if somebody starts a fire at the library… Endangering almost 1000 people who actually live in Silverado … The fire is going to block the only way out of Silverado.
Then, what about the people at the library? How are they going to get evacuated without vehicles? There’s only one fire station, plus a volunteer station. There’s no way they can get those people out of there.
If you think the fire chance is remote — note the fires that have already been started due to the homeless people cooking and using fires for heat.
Then there’s the fact there’s no transportation. Silverado has no bus service, it’s an act of Congress to get Lyft and Uber to come out there and most of the time they refuse . Again, people who want to work can no longer ride their bikes to work like they used to be able to do at the riverbed.
We should not have expelled all those people from the river bed, until we had an actual plan for what to do.
This is literally the dumbest idea I’ve heard them come up with yet.
If the price of to South County this WERE to bring a sewer system, internet, cable, and cell towers into Silverado, would it be worth considering? If so, Silverado should ask for it now.
I get the “fire danger” problem, but I don’t think that this would exacerbate it. This would be an indoors location for homeless people (and most likely, by the logic Reggie presents above, for homeless families), so you wouldn’t have the “homeless people cooking on butane (or whatever) under the overpass” sort of situations that have been blamed (rightly or wrongly) for other fires. They’d be cooking indoors, in kitchens. That said, the ability to evacuate the center in the event of fire or other disaster certainly should be a consideration — and that itself might be enough to kill this site. (I had thought, though, that there is an “emergency exit” path through the Cleveland National Forest. Is this an
urbanrural legend?the lack of transportation — and I’ve been envisioning the center having a van or something — is another important point. To the extent that it would be considered unnecessary, because “these people ain’t going anywhere,” the site becomes that much more legitimate for the homeless to reject the offer. To the extent that they might be doing so because the ability to travel means opportunity for panhandling and buying alcohol — as critics will surely allege whether it’s true or not — this will bring the crux of what sort of existence homeless people deserve to the front and center. That will be an interesting debate.
You’re right about the riverbed expulsions — except perhaps for the likelihood that it might well have worked had the case been assigned to a less rights-respecting judge than Judge Carter.
It’s very valuable to have a Silverado resident involved in this discussion, Pam; thank you for coming here and I hope you’ll continue to participate. And I also hope that you and your residents will get your views to both the OC leadership and to Judge Carter’s court!
Pam: “As long as you’re at it, please bring reliable Internet, cable, and cell phones. No one’s even talked about that.”
Troubling…mobile providers extract enormous fees to expand coverage into rural areas – curious why yours. I’ve argued elsewhere that the subsidy probably does more to enlarge dividends for investors and finance major corporate purchases than it does to actually expand coverage to rural areas…if your region is neglected, that may demonstrate my contention.
Even more troubling…
“because all the property behind the library is the preserve and those trails can’t be opened up.”
What sort of preserve? Seems plausible to me that one path toward converting a preserve into a development might include housing homeless nearby, letting them damage the preserve, then starting a process of privatization to ‘save part of the preserve.’ If fire drives off a number of residents…a well-placed developer with very a long-term project might get cheap land in the OC through such means…
ahem, that is, ‘curious why your region has been skipped.’ My theory was mostly developed by looking at cell phone access in the high desert/San Bernardino mountains regions, but yours might follow similar incentives if it’s a small enough community.
Not surprised by the uber/lyft drivers – their incentives are pretty transparent.
Here is an easy solution to housing the homeless: Each city and the county is responsible for providing a percentage of the housing needed in proportion to their share of the population in the county. Yes, that means you Villa Park! Homeless affiliated with a community could be given priority to be housed in the community with the remainder of those needing housing shared among the open beds. No one community is responsible for housing everyone and we all learn how to better manage our resources to benefit all segments of the community.
exactly
A little digging shows that area is not in the “Sphere of Influence” approved by Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission http://oclafco.org for Irvine or any South County City. Not their resource to designate the use of. Orange and/or Tustin should be consulted (it’s hard to tell on the map provided.)
http://oclafco.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Map-Final-4-10-2017.pdf
It looks like unincorporated OC is not in any Sphere of Influence. It must be. So whose?
Amen, Reggie. Let’s stop pretending that any community is so pristine that they don’t have their own fair share of the poor. We must divide the populations of every community to find their allocation of housing for those in need. I think Anaheim and Santa Ana need to be given credit in that allocation for the resources we already provide (and the hit our communities have already taken, including the now-proven actions of those other cities dumping their homeless in Anaheim and Santa Ana.)
I don’t understand why we keep coming up with these half-baked ideas for “homeless housing,” with all of them assuming “the homeless” are scary criminals who will harm our children, steal our belongings, and destroy our property values. Separate the criminal element from the truly needy. Now separate the DRUG PROBLEM from the homeless crisis. Now take the truly homeless and determine which are seniors in need of a specialized setting for aging in place, on a low income. Now, how many are families with children? Let’s build units with some small secondary bedrooms for kids, and homework help/community room/computer room and play space. How many are medically fragile/in need of some service care and/or the dying in need of hospice-type care but all needing to keep a mate nearby instead of being separated? Let’s build family-type units for them, perhaps associated with a hospital and/or teaching facility. Address the needs of human beings beyond the identifying fact that they are without shelter, which fails to define who they are or what their long-term needs are.
When we build the housing to suit the need, then where the tenants come from is none of anyone’s business to object to–literally, because these needs often fall under HIPPA and NOBODY should know if residents/tenants/clients are homeless or simply part of the general population, outside of criminal checks (which is better assurance then I get when the slumlord running the bungalow courts next door rents to yet another drug dealer!) If we build HOUSING to meet the needs of OC’s low-income residents, allocated by population throughout the County (which is what SCAG mandates were supposed to do until cities ignored them) we fix the crisis. I would be all in for providing Anaheim services to those with Anaheim connections, and the other cities should do the same. if we all care for our own, we fix this. This also prevents the mass migration of those in other states looking for a better deal than their hometowns give them. We CANNOT offer a low-rent option to everyone who wants to live in costly So Cal.
Once we have planned for the needs of those in distress, across the County, THEN we can address the SEPARATE issues of drug addiction and criminal elements who will NOT be included in that first round of specialized housing, but have dragged down the discussion for too long. The stereotypes help politicians avoid dealing with a difficult situation but they don’t FIX what is broken, and YES, south county, you DO have a broken economic system that lets the bottom drop out on your own residents, just like the rest of us.
This idea to use the elementary school is a really bad idea
Why, if it’s along the lines of what Reggie suggests? A neighboring atea could hardly ask for better choice of “duty” than hosting intact families. Orange and Tustin would be fortunate to have that on their “tab.”
Excellent information. Please sign petition below:
We’ve been working very closely with the Mayor of Lake Forest, Dr. Jim Gardner, the Mayor Pro Tem, and other interested individuals. Mayor Gardner was the sole voice of reason at the South County Mayors’ meeting and is an advocate for Silverado, and more importantly a leader in providing thoughtful, humane solutions for our homeless population.
Below is a link to the petition that we worked on together. Please sign and send to as many people as you can. We’d like to have as many signatures as possible before the Board of Supervisors’ meeting Tuesday morning. We will have signs available for those that are at the meeting with “Fair Share” on them.
https://www.change.org/p/orange-county-board-of-supervisors-library-of-the-canyons-is-not-a-viable-solution-to-the-county-s-homeless-crisis?recruiter=871774737&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=share_petition
Truth! Add the fire dangers, no services such as medical, and getting killed by highway speed traffic, and South county mayor’s and cities have an enormous lawsuit.
Seems to me financial penalties might work better than blocking the anti-camping ordinances…fine each district/city $100/night per homeless for defying the law, apply that to shelter…
Fire – many homeless smoke. One wayward Cigarette & that’s it.
Ironically that’s the temporary evacuation site for large animals (mainly horses) for all of Silverado. OC approved 2 stables in Silverado – and there are now more than 100 horses on a narrow canyon road with one way in and one way out. In the event of fire, the library facility is where they go.
If somebody had actually been to the site, they would realize that not only is it not still a closed school—but there are a bunch of stalls on the parking lot. This is why.
The county is frankly terrible at planning for horses and large animals. I’m on the large animal rescue team, I was evacuating horses during the canyon 2 fire, and it was a mess.
It’s a shame we’ve gotten so far from our agricultural roots. In fact, the main evacuation site they go once the fire encroaches on the library is the OC fair grounds, and the fair board is proposing to close that, and the stables at the OC Fair Grounds. (They already got rid of calves at the Fair, that’s a whole other story.)
Fire is a very real danger, and I’ve lived through the 2007, 2014 and 2017 fires. I’ve been on the horse and large animal rareuve teams in several forms since they started in OC (2004 or 2003.)
Obviously no one but Mayor Gardener making these proposals has ever been to this area. He cane after the fact—but at least he did.
I was appointed in RSM a long time (10 years). I lived there 19 years. I know what most of them think of the canyons. This proposal is absolutely an attempt to deflect responsibility, and dump the homeless someplace that’s not in their backyard.
This site was not chosen because they think it’s practical.
Further, the site will not house for hundred cots or even 50 cots. It consists of four classrooms. The library is 2 of the classrooms and there’s a community center that is use for meetings for 4H and the community in the other two classrooms.
I think if the mayors of South County believe it’s fair and right to put the homeless in libraries and community centers, we ought to look at all of the libraries and community centers in South County. I can tell you for fact the community center in Rancho Santa Margarita, Laguna Hills, and Mission Viejo are EACH larger than the entire site of the Silverado Library.
Translation:
Pam: It’s terrible no one wants these homeless in their own backyards.
I sure don’t want them in mine.
Everyone else must be the problem.
Where do you get the blinders necessary to see Pam’s comments — about the fire hazard, dangerous road, evacuation rish, and isolation — in this light? They seem so effective that I want to get some of them to wear in the event of a nuclear war.
If Silverado were held to a per capita contribution to addressing the problem of housing the homeless, I wonder whether its “tab” would be closer to 0 or 1?
I checked out the Voice of OC comments section — which VOC treats with a level of neglect equal to the care that goes into their articles — on this topic. One of the main anonymous conservative insult comics who make it unbearable, a persona called “LFOldTimer,” was perhaps startled enough by the proximity of Lake Forest to Silverado to offer something like an actually thought-out nubbin of a conservative policy proposal. So I’m porting it over here for our comments; from here on it’s him, not me:
What do you think?
Great article and particularly in regard to these cities clearly abusing Judge Carter’s orders.
BECAUSE I don’t want to tell these cities what to do (the judge already did that), the only thing I will offer is… proportionality.
What the 13 SO. COUNTY cities take on should be proportional to their populations.
Since Warner seems to believe that it’s fine they close our only library and cause the closure of our only children’s center, apparently, perhaps Warner should personally chose the library and day care center in his own city to close to serve this purpose.
Just a thought.
Thanks, Sherry. When people ask me why I blog, the fact that publications from the esteemed OC Register to the beloved Voice of OC ran with favorable stories about the South County Mayors’ meeting for over a day before I pointed out here that this site was not IN South County is a great example of why. Sometimes all it takes is a little push to turn the likes of Todd Spitzer from proponent to opponent, something small enough for a blog to provide.
Here’s the latest on the subject, much improved, from the Voice of OC: https://voiceofoc.org/2018/04/canyons-homeless-shelter-opposed-by-two-supervisors/
And this first-person write-up by Lake Forest Mayor Jim Gardner — a coup by the Voice that one would hope the Register would have sought — is also a must-read for anyone interested in this South County scheme: https://voiceofoc.org/2018/04/gardner-proposal-for-new-homeless-shelter-in-the-canyons-inappropriate/
Anyone have a list of the names of the South Mayors who were at the meeting? They should be “thanked” personally.
First shoe dropped the other day – press release from Spitzer:
“The Orange County Board of Supervisors unanimously decided in a closed session today that Silverado Canyon is not an option to create a new homeless shelter. The county will notify the mayors of South County that a $6-million library site is not suitable.
“’The homeless need access to medical care, job training and mental health facilities and this rural library is not a good option,’ Supervisor Todd Spitzer said. ‘I want to thank all my constituents for showing their concern by attending a town hall last night and the Board meeting today. The residents of Silverado take great pride in their community as do I. This site is just too geographically isolated and the Board has heard your concerns.'”
Next shoe would be Carter I assume. Although also, Santa Ana is now suing EVERY OTHER OC CITY for not doing enough! (Come on, even Anaheim and Fullerton?)
https://local.nixle.com/alert/6533334/?sub_id=1000007140
When’s the next Carterpalooza? I gotta clear my schedule for that.
I just re-read this after I found a map of the current supervisorial districts here (for a story I’m planning on the new ones approved yesterday); it’s probably among my favorites of the pieces I’ve written. And I especially love the speed with which Spitzer burned rubber doing a 180 once I pointed out that the “South County contribution” to solving homelessness was in his own northeastern district. I wish that he still reacted as well to what we write!