Editorial: Group Homes Play an Important Role in Local Communities
Revenues and tax dollars are so tight these days it’s understandable that a municipality’s leaders would be concerned about losing a piece of property from the tax rolls–any property.
The tax cap and outrageous bills to fund state pensions, among other factors, leave towns with little maneuverability.
Last week, members of the Mount Pleasant Town Board said they would oppose two applications for group homes–one in Thornwood, the other on Bear Ridge Road in Pleasantville–in large part because there are too many parcels that are tax exempt and Mount Pleasant already hosts its fair share of residential facilities.
No matter how the town’s leaders may try to couch their comments it’s impossible not to wince. How can intelligent people appear to sound so callous? That may not have been their intention but that’s certainly how their comments come across.
Unfortunately, by taking this position the board does its part in igniting more of the anti-group home hysteria that plays out in communities throughout suburbia. The myth has been perpetuated that people who are developmentally disabled somehow pose a danger to their neighbors and a threat to property values in the host neighborhoods.
However, the group home concept is one of the excellent advances of the past 40 years. The model accelerated after the 1970s, when the deplorable conditions at the Willowbrook State School in Staten Island were uncovered. Thankfully, our society has come a long way in treating the developmentally disabled or the recovering addicts or the troubled teens or some other population that needs a facility. Fortunately, today those residents are treated more humanely and with the respect they deserve.
No one is saying that Mount Pleasant needs to rubberstamp the two applications. If there are legitimate environmental, safety or planning issues at hand then it is officials’ responsibility to protect their town.
However, the Mount Pleasant Town Board’s reaction last week was an unseemly overreaction. The two homes combined will host a maximum of 10 residents, hardly an overwhelming influx for a population that is generally not independent.
And just how will two private houses coming off the tax rolls put the town in a make-or-break fiscal situation?
While Mount Pleasant has done more than its fair share in hosting group homes, there may be a sound reason for that. Geographically it is one of the county’s largest municipalities, so there’s a greater chance to be able to locate a group home. If run by responsible organizations, the homes pose no greater threat to neighbors in most cases than a family next door.
Let’s hope Mount Pleasant officials remember that and evaluate the applications on the merits and not feed into ugly stereotypes from another century.
Adam has worked in the local news industry for the past two decades in Westchester County and the broader Hudson Valley. Read more from Adam’s author bio here.