Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Community Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors decry alleged drug activity, oppose youth group home next to alleged sober‑living house on Bellflower Drive

5664384 · August 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Multiple residents told the council that a property on Bellflower Drive run as a sober‑living house has produced police calls and an overdose; they said a newly approved youth group home next door threatens neighborhood safety and asked the council for assistance.

Several Bellflower Drive neighbors addressed the La Mesa City Council on Aug. 12 to protest what they described as ongoing public‑safety problems at a nearby property they say operates as a problematic sober‑living home. Neighbors said the house generates frequent emergency calls and described a July 23 overdose response that involved multiple police cars, an ambulance and a fire truck.

Why it matters: Neighbors said the block is residential and includes families and older adults; they asked the council and staff to intervene after learning that a permit has been approved for a youth group home at a neighboring address. Speakers said they support legitimate treatment and youth programs but oppose placing a youth facility alongside a house with repeated emergency responses.

At the meeting, resident Billy Belts said neighbors are “extremely concerned” and that the situation has created a climate in which children do not go outside. Craig Riley (representing neighbors) and other commenters said they have collected petitions opposing the group home placement. Several residents specifically named the property operator and gave dates of recent police activity; one speaker said a La Mesa police detective told neighbors there were “no drugs in the home,” which the speaker disputed and called inconsistent with recent overdose responses.

Council did not take formal action on the matter at the Aug. 12 meeting. The speakers asked for immediate assistance and said they would like the council or staff to review the approvals and consider remedies that do not rely on state law changes. Council members took public comment and did not announce a directive or vote on a specific enforcement or zoning action during the meeting.