Not in my neighborhood.

[Snookie]

What does dope have anything to do with it. That statement is ridiculous.



http://www.planningcommunications.com/gh/illinois_impact_on_surrounding_neighborhood.pdf

I would not want any rich kids on dope living next to me.

Really? Are you against the legalization of pot?

Would you rather poor people on dope? Or, like Ernie pointed out, apparently you would rather have crazy people on dope next to you.

Your wealth envy is showing , you might want to cover that up.

Pot is a medical herb from God.

 

[jwoodie]

What does dope have anything to do with it. That statement is ridiculous.

You call them entitled. That is rather funny considering they PAID FOR IT. That is not entitlement. Entitlement is when you expect OTHERS to hand it to you; like the ones trying to move into the group home. They generally have god reason though, mentally challenged people really cannot provide what they need and deserve the basics provided to them.

It is worth noting though that while they have the right to try and block the move; such fears seem to be unfounded. From a fairly compressive study done in Illinois:
Sale Price:



Stability (turnover rate):

Safety:

In general, there is not mu reason to block the move – the fears of the impacts are unjustified.

http://www.planningcommunications.com/gh/illinois_impact_on_surrounding_neighborhood.pdf

Quote:
Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home.


According to this "study," group homes in the neighborhood actually INCREASE property values. Sure they do...

Addressed in the study if you bothered to read it. Obviously you would rather be ignorant than look at actual facts.

Come back when you have something more than outright rejection of scientific studies because you don’t like the outcomes.

Ooh, I feel sooo chastised! Especially by someone who doesn't like his own posts quoted back to him. As to your 1986 study:

FINDINGS Property Values

FINDING: Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home. This finding reflects the data and statistical tests shown in Table 1: Changes in Mean Sales Price Before and After Dates on Which Group Homes Q:iened. 17 After a group home opened, property values rose in 11 of the 14 group home neighborhoods and in 10 of the 14 corresponding control neighborhoods. Three group home neighborhoods experienced minor decreases in average sale price: MP-6 (-$614 or -0.67%), 1-8 (-$105 or -0.3%), and C-I0 (-$513 or -1.3%). The decreases in three of the four control neighborhoods that experienced declines were mOl:e substantial: CHI-4 (-$1988 or -3.7%), G-5 (-$74 or -0.1%), 1-8 (-$5904 or -14.9%), and R··14 (-$1628 or -3.0%). By itself, this raw data could lead to an unwarranted conclusion that the presence of a group home generally leads to increased property values. However, the change in before and after mean sale price for each group home neighborhood must still be subjected to one of the most rigorous statistical tests, the student 1 s t-test, to determine whether the difference between the before and after mean sale price is due to chance or to establishing the group home. 18 Applying the t-test. which is explained in Appendix A, Table 1 shows that only one of the differences in before and after mean sale prices is statistically significant. That is, in all but one case, the differences could be due solely to chance. The only statistically significant change was the 21 percent increase in the neighborhood around the Schaumburg group home. This increase was probably due to factors other than opening the group home. The data in Table 1 strongly indicate that opening a group home does not affect property values in the surrounding community.​

It should be obvious to anyone with a three digit IQ that this "study" reeks with predetermined "findings" that surrounding property values are unaffected by the presence of group homes. The same "statistics" which are used to "prove" this point are disregarded when they absurdly suggest an increase in property values. The definition of "neighborhood" is also suspect: House prices a mile away from the group home are obviously less likely to be affected than those next door.

All of this illustrates the paucity of intellectual value in posts which merely quote other sources rather than express any original thoughts.

 

[Katzndogz]

I would not want any rich kids on dope living next to me.

Really? Are you against the legalization of pot?

Would you rather poor people on dope? Or, like Ernie pointed out, apparently you would rather have crazy people on dope next to you.

Your wealth envy is showing , you might want to cover that up.

Pot is a medical herb from God.

So is Oleander!

 

[bodecea]

York county in Virginia is full of rich people and conservatives.


"Residents upset over group home plans
Andy_Fox_reports_on_group_home_battle_in_125839_25608759
YORK COUNTY, Va. (WAVY) - Not in my backyard -- that's what people in York County are saying about a group home planned for their neighborhood. Wednesday night residents fought against the facility at a public hearing."

There are plenty of churches in the area where people go every week to hear the gospels of Jesus and the holy people.

Read the following article about their refusal to allow a special needs home to be built on their turf.

How Christian.

WAVY - YC residents fight proposed group home | WAVY.com | York County

We had people in our Red District come thru with petitions to stop a Children's Home near us....got quite hostile when we didn't agree with their petition and wouldn't sign.

The Home is there now.

 

[Katzndogz]

Opposing the opening of a group home doesn't always work. The existence of such should be disclosed to anyone planning on purchasing a home in the area. If they want to have their property values increased by living near a group home, they can buy. If they object, they can look elsewhere.

It is probably a good idea for anyone planning on buying a home to ask if there are any group homes or halfway houses nearby.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Hey if you want a bunch of schizo mentally ill dangerous people living in your neighborhood then why don't you volunteer your home to the state for that purpose?

Personally I wouldn't want a bunch of potentially dangerous mentally ill people living next to me.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Opposing the opening of a group home doesn't always work. The existence of such should be disclosed to anyone planning on purchasing a home in the area. If they want to have their property values increased by living near a group home, they can buy. If they object, they can look elsewhere.

It is probably a good idea for anyone planning on buying a home to ask if there are any group homes or halfway houses nearby.

You actually think property values would increase if a 24/7/365 state run nut house was built in your neighborhood?

 

[Katzndogz]

Opposing the opening of a group home doesn't always work. The existence of such should be disclosed to anyone planning on purchasing a home in the area. If they want to have their property values increased by living near a group home, they can buy. If they object, they can look elsewhere.

It is probably a good idea for anyone planning on buying a home to ask if there are any group homes or halfway houses nearby.

You actually think property values would increase if a 24 hour state run nut house was built in your neighborhood?

Of course not! That's insane. It's just a liberal myth that has been promoted right here. Read up a little. However, IF liberals want to believe that nonsense, they won't mind paying a premium to live near a 24 hour state run nut house.

 

[asterism]

What does dope have anything to do with it. That statement is ridiculous.

You call them entitled. That is rather funny considering they PAID FOR IT. That is not entitlement. Entitlement is when you expect OTHERS to hand it to you; like the ones trying to move into the group home. They generally have god reason though, mentally challenged people really cannot provide what they need and deserve the basics provided to them.

It is worth noting though that while they have the right to try and block the move; such fears seem to be unfounded. From a fairly compressive study done in Illinois:
Sale Price:



Stability (turnover rate):

Safety:

In general, there is not mu reason to block the move – the fears of the impacts are unjustified.

http://www.planningcommunications.com/gh/illinois_impact_on_surrounding_neighborhood.pdf

Quote:
Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home.


According to this "study," group homes in the neighborhood actually INCREASE property values. Sure they do...

Addressed in the study if you bothered to read it. Obviously you would rather be ignorant than look at actual facts.

Come back when you have something more than outright rejection of scientific studies because you don’t like the outcomes.

You're reading the results from this OLD report wrong. It shows no causal link between a group home and a non-group home. It shows a slightly higher percentage of neighborhoods that experienced a rise in property values.

In fact, the study explicitly states this:

"By itself, this raw data could lead to an unwarranted conclusion that the presence of a group home generally leads to increased property values. However, the change in before and after mean sale price for each group home neighborhood must still be subjected to one of the most rigorous statistical tests, the student 1 s t-test, to determine whether the difference between the before and after mean sale price is due to chance or to establishing the group home."



Then there's this:

"Clearly, property values generally rose during the study period. The aver*age mean sale price in the 14 group home neighborhoods rose from $60,303 to $63,318 after group homes opened, an average increase of $3015. The average mean sale price in the 14 control neighborhoods rose $4099, from $57,831 to $61,930. "

So this study shows that overall there is no decrease in property values by opening a group home. However two somewhat affluent neighborhoods were included, one with a group home and one without. Any guesses on the results?

MT PROSPECT MP-6: Mean Sales prices of $110,705 before the group home, $110,091 after the group home while the control neighborhood without a group home was $91,004 and $105,895 during the same time period.

So it appears the study you cited supports the concerns of the owners in the OP.

 

[Katzndogz]

It is up to each home buyer to investigate and assess what the current neighborhood is like. If there is a group home or some type of transitional housing they need to find that out. Or, just buy a home controlled by a strong HOA.

 

[FA_Q2]

Quote:
Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home.


According to this "study," group homes in the neighborhood actually INCREASE property values. Sure they do...

Addressed in the study if you bothered to read it. Obviously you would rather be ignorant than look at actual facts.

Come back when you have something more than outright rejection of scientific studies because you don’t like the outcomes.

Ooh, I feel sooo chastised! Especially by someone who doesn't like his own posts quoted back to him. As to your 1986 study:

FINDINGS Property Values

FINDING: Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home. This finding reflects the data and statistical tests shown in Table 1: Changes in Mean Sales Price Before and After Dates on Which Group Homes Q:iened. 17 After a group home opened, property values rose in 11 of the 14 group home neighborhoods and in 10 of the 14 corresponding control neighborhoods. Three group home neighborhoods experienced minor decreases in average sale price: MP-6 (-$614 or -0.67%), 1-8 (-$105 or -0.3%), and C-I0 (-$513 or -1.3%). The decreases in three of the four control neighborhoods that experienced declines were mOl:e substantial: CHI-4 (-$1988 or -3.7%), G-5 (-$74 or -0.1%), 1-8 (-$5904 or -14.9%), and R··14 (-$1628 or -3.0%). By itself, this raw data could lead to an unwarranted conclusion that the presence of a group home generally leads to increased property values. However, the change in before and after mean sale price for each group home neighborhood must still be subjected to one of the most rigorous statistical tests, the student 1 s t-test, to determine whether the difference between the before and after mean sale price is due to chance or to establishing the group home. 18 Applying the t-test. which is explained in Appendix A, Table 1 shows that only one of the differences in before and after mean sale prices is statistically significant. That is, in all but one case, the differences could be due solely to chance. The only statistically significant change was the 21 percent increase in the neighborhood around the Schaumburg group home. This increase was probably due to factors other than opening the group home. The data in Table 1 strongly indicate that opening a group home does not affect property values in the surrounding community.​

It should be obvious to anyone with a three digit IQ that this "study" reeks with predetermined "findings" that surrounding property values are unaffected by the presence of group homes. The same "statistics" which are used to "prove" this point are disregarded when they absurdly suggest an increase in property values. The definition of "neighborhood" is also suspect: House prices a mile away from the group home are obviously less likely to be affected than those next door.

All of this illustrates the paucity of intellectual value in posts which merely quote other sources rather than express any original thoughts.

Then you should be able to come up with a single study that disputes the findings. I await with bated breath your oh so enlightening study.

 

[FA_Q2]

Quote:
Property values rose in 79 percent of the neighborhoods with a group home and in 71 percent of the neighborhoods that did not contain a group home.


According to this "study," group homes in the neighborhood actually INCREASE property values. Sure they do...

Addressed in the study if you bothered to read it. Obviously you would rather be ignorant than look at actual facts.

Come back when you have something more than outright rejection of scientific studies because you don’t like the outcomes.

You're reading the results from this OLD report wrong. It shows no causal link between a group home and a non-group home. It shows a slightly higher percentage of neighborhoods that experienced a rise in property values.

In fact, the study explicitly states this:

"By itself, this raw data could lead to an unwarranted conclusion that the presence of a group home generally leads to increased property values. However, the change in before and after mean sale price for each group home neighborhood must still be subjected to one of the most rigorous statistical tests, the student 1 s t-test, to determine whether the difference between the before and after mean sale price is due to chance or to establishing the group home."



Then there's this:

"Clearly, property values generally rose during the study period. The aver*age mean sale price in the 14 group home neighborhoods rose from $60,303 to $63,318 after group homes opened, an average increase of $3015. The average mean sale price in the 14 control neighborhoods rose $4099, from $57,831 to $61,930. "

So this study shows that overall there is no decrease in property values by opening a group home. However two somewhat affluent neighborhoods were included, one with a group home and one without. Any guesses on the results?

MT PROSPECT MP-6: Mean Sales prices of $110,705 before the group home, $110,091 after the group home while the control neighborhood without a group home was $91,004 and $105,895 during the same time period.

So it appears the study you cited supports the concerns of the owners in the OP.

Only in the single outlier.

I would be interested though in the other neighborhoods. I will look a little closer as to the different neighborhoods when I have some more time. Perhaps you have something if the study did not include enough affluent neighborhoods to compare to this situation.

 

[kiwiman127]

These group homes are for people with Intellectual disability and development disabilities.

Intellectual Disabilities refers to a group of disorders characterized by a limited mental capacity and difficulty with adaptive behaviors such as managing money, schedules and routines, or social interactions. Intellectual disability originates before the age of 18 and may result from physical causes, such as autism or cerebral palsy, or from nonphysical causes, such as lack of stimulation and adult responsiveness.
Developmental disability is a severe, long term disability that can affect cognitive ability, physical functioning, or both. These disabilities appear before age 22 and are likely to be life-long. The term “developmental disability” encompasses intellectual disability but also includes physical disabilities. Some developmental disabilities may be solely physical, such as blindness from birth. Others involve both physical and intellectual disabilities stemming from genetic or other causes, such as Down syndrome and fetal alcohol syndrome.

Obviously these homes are for the mentally disabled/handicapped, not people who have issues with mental diseases that may be prone to dangerous behavior.
Would those protesting also protest a home for people with physical disabilities? Frankly, there is no difference.
The Bible tells us to help those who are disabled, not to shun the disabled.
This is certainly telling about the morals of those who are protesting. I bet God is shaking his head at these privileged self-centered jerks.
"Waaa, my property value might drop if my neighborhood has a facility that actually helps the disabled! Those people belong in neighborhoods where people like us don't live."

 

[kiwiman127]

So in other words, someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. Think about that!

 

[Snookie]

So in other words, someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. Think about that!

Of course. So would Sarah Palin.

 

[Katzndogz]

So in other words, someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. Think about that!

Someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be in a group home, but in his own home with his own family caring for him.

 

[kiwiman127]

So in other words, someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. Think about that!

Someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be in a group home, but in his own home with his own family caring for him.

Not all children like Trig Palin have parents who are millionaires, many come from homes of working Americans. But then that isn't the point, is it? The point is some like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. No, this neighborhood doesn't want to live in the reality of the real world, because they themselves, are privileged.
Now this particular attitude isn't carried by all privileged neighborhoods. A few years ago a well known treatment center purchased a late 1900's mansion for a halfway house for their patients in long term care. The house was smack in the middle of some of the wealthiest people's mansions in Saint Paul. What did they do? They donated monies for the purchase and interior renovations to make in serviceable to be a group home. They were the biggest supporters!
Some people have class and know their wealth isn't everything, others think their wealth is the most important thing in the world. In other words these people don't worship their wealth.

 

[Katzndogz]

So in other words, someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. Think about that!

Someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be in a group home, but in his own home with his own family caring for him.

Not all children like Trig Palin have parents who are millionaires, many come from homes of working Americans. But then that isn't the point, is it? The point is some like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. No, this neighborhood doesn't want to live in the reality of the real world, because they themselves, are privileged.
Now this particular attitude isn't carried by all privileged neighborhoods. A few years ago a well known treatment center purchased a late 1900's mansion for a halfway house for their patients in long term care. The house was smack in the middle of some of the wealthiest people's mansions in Saint Paul. What did they do? They donated monies for the purchase and interior renovations to make in serviceable to be a group home. They were the biggest supporters!
Some people have class and no their wealth isn't everything, others think their wealth is the most important thing in the world. In other words they don't worship their wealth.

Rich people don't live in the reality of the real world. They don't have to. If they can't buy their own reality, what's the point of having money?

They can allow a group home if they wish or not. Or, the level of disability at a group home they do allow. If they don't want one, they shouldn't have to have one.

 

[kiwiman127]

Someone like Trig Palin wouldn't be in a group home, but in his own home with his own family caring for him.

Not all children like Trig Palin have parents who are millionaires, many come from homes of working Americans. But then that isn't the point, is it? The point is some like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. No, this neighborhood doesn't want to live in the reality of the real world, because they themselves, are privileged.
Now this particular attitude isn't carried by all privileged neighborhoods. A few years ago a well known treatment center purchased a late 1900's mansion for a halfway house for their patients in long term care. The house was smack in the middle of some of the wealthiest people's mansions in Saint Paul. What did they do? They donated monies for the purchase and interior renovations to make in serviceable to be a group home. They were the biggest supporters!
Some people have class and no their wealth isn't everything, others think their wealth is the most important thing in the world. In other words they don't worship their wealth.

Rich people don't live in the reality of the real world. They don't have to. If they can't buy their own reality, what's the point of having money?

They can allow a group home if they wish or not. Or, the level of disability at a group home they do allow. If they don't want one, they shouldn't have to have one.

Yeah, they can put it an area where people are real God loving people who take their faith seriously versus those who don't take the 10 Commandments seriously.

 

[Katzndogz]

Not all children like Trig Palin have parents who are millionaires, many come from homes of working Americans. But then that isn't the point, is it? The point is some like Trig Palin wouldn't be welcomed there. No, this neighborhood doesn't want to live in the reality of the real world, because they themselves, are privileged.
Now this particular attitude isn't carried by all privileged neighborhoods. A few years ago a well known treatment center purchased a late 1900's mansion for a halfway house for their patients in long term care. The house was smack in the middle of some of the wealthiest people's mansions in Saint Paul. What did they do? They donated monies for the purchase and interior renovations to make in serviceable to be a group home. They were the biggest supporters!
Some people have class and no their wealth isn't everything, others think their wealth is the most important thing in the world. In other words they don't worship their wealth.

Rich people don't live in the reality of the real world. They don't have to. If they can't buy their own reality, what's the point of having money?

They can allow a group home if they wish or not. Or, the level of disability at a group home they do allow. If they don't want one, they shouldn't have to have one.

Yeah, they can put it an area where people are real God loving people who take their faith seriously versus those who don't take the 10 Commandments seriously.

There ya go. Problem solved.