I am representing the law firm that you, the residents of the 600th block of Pine Street have approached hoping to prevent Beacon House, Inc., from opening and operating a center intended to house runaway youths. Your community's assumptions do not give sufficient reason as to why development of the center should be prohibited from your neighborhood because assuming that a group of teenagers will engage in unlawful activity is not cause to determine that the center presence is a danger to your community. .
Beacon House, Inc., legally purchased an apartment building situated on the 600th block of Pine Street. The building is being renovated and is later intended to open as a center used to aid and house a group of runaway youths. Beacon House currently operates two other centers in similar communities. One center has fallen to hardship, the other center maintains to have no occurrences of crime or violence. .
The law in Connecticut is those in a community wanting to cease development or operation of a facility must offer substantial reason for doing so by presenting evidence of an actual problem or proof that the facility will follow an already existing pattern of problems. In the leading case, Nicholson v. Connecticut Half-Way House., 147 Conn.507, 208 A.2d 383 (1966), a community's assumptions or fears alone do not present just cause as to why a facility must be prevented from operating in the community "those protesting must present an already exiting problem or evidence that the facility will certainly create a problem to the community. .
Connecticut Halfway House, Inc., purchased a home in a primarily residential area, intending to use the purchased home as a center to aid recently paroled men from the state prison. Connecticut Half-way House intended to use the home as a half-way house to provide temporary housing and rehabilitative counseling to the parolees "aiding the men with the readjustment from jail to society.