Readers comments 7-2-21 | Claremont COURIER

Imperative problem
Dear Editor:

Kudos to you, the COURIER staff and especially Mick Rhodes for last week’s compelling issue. The investigative report on Rooter Hero was eye-opening to say the least. I had no idea there were such scammers around but we have been lucky enough to have a professional and honest plumber for a long time. It is particularly appalling that this plumbing company is using their bait and exchange tactics on the seniors in the area, who often fail to reach out for referrals or seek another bid. I look forward to the next three parts.

The second article by Mr. Rhodes made the scourge of drugs in our society and community very real and very personal. It was beautifully and sensitively written, and I applaud the family for sharing their tragic journey with their son with the wider community. The writer’s empathy for the family and “the wounded walkers among us” deeply impressed me as a parent and grandparent, and, I’m sure, every parent who read the article.

Mary F. Weis
Claremont

Powerful writing
Dear Editor:

Thank you so much for printing the powerful and moving article about Per Dahlin and her son, Sam. I’ve known Per for many years because our children grew up together and I remember enjoying Sam’s performances at the Claremont High School theater. Per is an incredible woman. Whatever she suffers, she always has a cheerful smile and a kind word for everyone. It was incredibly brave of her to share her full story with our community. I know she allows her and her son’s story to be told to empower the rest of us to grow in compassion for our out-of-home or addicted siblings and support efforts to help them and their families . May it be so. Thank you, Claremont Courier, for bringing this story, and thank you, Per, for being such a monumental voice of compassion in our midst.

Nancy Mintie
Claremont

Breaking with the past
Dear Editor:

At Tuesday’s City Council meeting, the troubling and uncertain issue of our community’s commitment to meeting the affordable housing needs of our current and future residents became the top concern during public commentary on the Village South Specific Plan (VSSP). . In its current and still controversial version, the VSSP does not prioritize affordability of its housing component, despite the proposal for a development that will make up most of the homes built in the near future.

Additionally, and because most of the discussion and public debate has focused on issues related to parking enforcement, building height, and other current building codes and zoning that are intended to preserve the single story, low-density character of our city, the process seemingly ignored the monumental challenge posed by the parallel effort to create a housing element and assume that will reach the unprecedented state-imposed numbers of low-income housing that were promised but never built in Claremont, and most quotes throughout the state.

Historically, Claremont, like most municipalities in the state, has drafted the periodically required updates and revisions of housing elements in a reactively compliant and publicly contested manner that is solely concerned with meeting the state’s allotment while acknowledging only our obligation to meet our self-assessed housing needs. This passive-aggressive, quasi-adversarial approach has resulted in housing elements lacking the public or private support to achieve implementation, which in turn encourages a level of NIMBYism that acts as a deterrent to developers of affordable housing.

This perfunctory response to California’s very real need for affordable housing, applied statewide, should be seen as a direct cause of California’s affordable housing and homeless shelter emergencies — and locally it was a base. for the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s determination that Claremont’s first update of 2017-2021 did not comply with regulations, resulting in a fine requiring our city to conduct a housing element review every four years and in rather than every eight years.

By allowing our hostility to comply with non-local legislative mandates to permeate the public process and the housing element that derives from it, we are failing to meet our moral obligation to implement housing policies that adhere to the values ​​and principles reflected in our 2006 General Plan , and the inclusiveness, diversity and socio-economic equality envisioned in our housing element.

I conclude by recognizing and praising the contribution our city employees are making to facilitate civic and informed participation in one of the most demanding and contentious public processes in our community.

And while significantly limited by the sluggishness of existing policies and precedents, they should also be credited with delivering reports that allow for public input and provide more than enough demographics to help our council address our local needs in objective terms and defined in a well-considered definition. way to confront NIMBYism, remove restrictions and adopt an unequivocal housing policy that facilitates the fulfillment of our collective moral obligation, while realizing that state mandates are nothing more than a reminder of the cumulative impact of failure to fulfill that obligation.

And finally, at Tuesday’s meeting, I suggested to the council to use the housing continuum concept as a possible alternative to processes that by design isolate the status quo and result in more of the same. It is my hope that the concept of the housing continuum will enable staff to: 1) assess our needs for affordable housing and shelter for the homeless in a comprehensive and integrated manner, providing a conceptual framework that facilitates housing consideration – Mandatory and reception needs of every resident of Claremont, of persons who are homeless and/or have special needs, across the household income spectrum from very low to well above the median; and 2) as a data management and organization tool, to assess and categorize the abundant demographics, both internally generated and mandated, in a manner that describes the housing and reception needs of our current and future residents.

Joseph Lyons
Claremont

Comments are closed.