I'm not so sure the classic NIMBY is a viable argument that we should always resort to in situations as these.

These centers have to be built somewhere and these are fellow humans and fellow New Yorkers so I don't quite understand the grounds of objections.

that's plumb in the middle of a nice residential community

So do we only locate these facilities where poor/low income people live?

People pay big money for those homes for a reason...you think they will locate them next to some politician house?

They have big open spaces upstate

Oi Riff, how about put it in a predominantly Muslim hood.

I agree they have big open spaces upstate but the point was to locate these kids/juveniles in their community as close to home as possible.

And yes, they should locate them next to some politician's house too.

We have the East Detention center in Scarborough, right next to a big tarass Bank with mostly factories on one side and apartments on the other. This is for up to 1 year sentencing. No problem far as I recall.

I am not a New Yorker,i will agree to keep the kids

closer to home which will be less burden for the

parents to visit.

CT have one in a residential area.

The same argument every time a public facility has to be located in or near a middle class or better community is the default "not in my back yard" argument.

It nauseates me. This is why Jamaica, a poor neighborhood, ends up being saturated with public buildings. To hell with the silly prejudices of South Ozone Park. They live in a society. This is part of the price of civilization.

Will these coolies and whites feel better if the City promises to house coolie and white criminals there too?

I'm sure our NIMBY protestors think this is another facility dedicated to housing dangerous black criminals.